^^LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. J 



4^/< 



^'£e^^ 



I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. {I 



LIBER LIBRORUM 



tibtx £ibr0rttm: 



ITS 



STRUCTURE, LIMITATIONS, AND PURPOSE. 



FRIENDLY COMMUNICATIOK 



TO 



A RELUCTANT SCEPTIC, 



^' 



^W^'V^/. 




/^ NEW YORK: 
CHARLES SCRIBNER & CO. 



186T. 



.33 






CONTENTS. 



PAGB 

Prefice to the American Edition * ... 7 

Preface 11 

CHAP. Introductory Correspondence 15 

I. Eeyelation and Inspiration 49 

II. The Extent op the Claim 58 

III. The Yerifying Faculty TG 

ly. Many Authors, but one Book . . . .91 

Y. Jewish History and Prophecy . . . .104 
YI. The New Testament . . . . " . .114 

YII. The Canon 128 

YIII. Difficulties in the Bible 142 

IX. Interpretation of Scripture 172 

X. The Modern Pharisee 185 

XI. A Postscript . . 198 



NOTES. 



A. Eminent "Witnesses 

B. Biblical Interpretation 

C. National Establishments 

D. Church Authority 

E. Idolatry or the Bible 



211 
214 
217 
224 
230 



PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION. 



The author of Liber Librorum firmly believes and 
earnestly defends the Historic Reality and the Super- 
natural Origin of the Mosaic and Christian systems. 
He also accepts the Incarnation, the Resurrection, 
and the Redemptive work of Christ, and the other 
important truths which these involve. In respect to 
all these points, his position is decisive, and strongly 
taken against the scepticism which is so fearfully 
prevalent in both England and America, in the form 
of an avowed rejection of these facts and truths, and 
of a secret misgiving that they may perhaps be 
outgrown, or set aside by the progress of modern 
thinking. 

He insists also upon the supreme authority of the 
Scriptures in respect to all questions of religious 
faith, and upon their permanent and indispensable 
superiority above all other books, as composed by 
men divinely aided and inspired. But he contends, 



b PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION. 

that to assert for them smj higher authority or inspi- 
ration, is to claim for them more than they claim for 
themselves, as well as to take a position that is both 
untenable and damaging to the interests of Christi- 
anity. To explain and vindicate what the author 
believes to be the correct view of inspiration, is one 
of the principal objects of this treatise. He has had 
the sagacity to discern, and the courage to avow, that 
the question of inspiration must be fairly met, and can 
no longer be either safely or honestly thrust aside. 
Dr. Arnold of Rugby wrote in 1835 of "the ap- 
proaches to that momentous question, which involves 
in it so great a shock to existing notions ; the great- 
est, probably, that has ever been given since the dis- 
covery of the falsehood of the doctrine of the Pope's 
infallibility. Yet it must come, and will end, in 
spite of the fears and clamours of the weak and bigot- 
ed, in the higher exalting and more sure establishing 
of Christian truth." The author of Liber Librordm 
believes that the time for discussing this question has 
fully come, and he discusses it like a brave and 
honest man, by looking squarely in the face the diffi- 
culties which attend the traditional theories. He 
does not, however, write for those whose hereditary 
faith is as yet undisturbed, but for the ' reluctant 
sceptics ' who find insuperable difficulties in accept- 



i 



PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION. 9 

ing what they conceive to be the current views of 
Christianity and the Scriptures. 

His leading positions may be briefly characterised 
by those which he opposes and rejects. 

1. He opposes the '' bibliolatry " which idolizes 
the letter of the Scriptures as against the claims of 
the Scriptures themselves, and the spirit of their 
contents. 

2. He opposes the pretensions of High Church 
arrogance, and the pharisaism of sensuous ritualism. 

3. He rejects also the narrowness of that theolo- 
gical dogmatism which reads every term and phrase 
of its creed and catechism between the lines of the 
Scriptures, and refuses to revise the traditions of 
schools of theology by the aid of better methods of 
interpretation. 

It would be idle to expect that all the opinions 
expressed in a volume written in such a spirit, and 
with such aims, will or ought to satisfy every reader. 
Some of these opinions are given as conjectures; 
others are manifestly not well considered. Some of 
the views of the writer, in respect to future retribu- 
tion, will be generally set aside, as unsupported by 
the testimony of the Scriptures. In respect to some 
points the work betrays marks of haste, both in 

thought and composition. But its spirit is earnest, 

1* 



10 PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION. 

honest, and Christian. It is believed that, as a whole 
it is eminently adapted to relieve the difficulties of 
the '^reluctant sceptic," and that it will be wel- 
comed by all those Christian believers who, in these 
times of trial to their common faith, have full con- 
fidence that a frank recognition of the difficulties of 
their argument is the only wise method of securing 
for it a triumph. While the book is not, and does 
not claim to be, an exhaustive argument for the 
truth of Christianity, it has at least this merit, that 
it successfully defends it against the ignorance and 
weakness of many of its defenders. 



PEEFAOE. 



Whatever may be the cause, it is but too certain 
that in the present day, both at home and abroad,, 
multitudes of religious young men, who a few years 
ago would have ranked as believers, are now, instead 
of attaching themselves to the Church, silently but 
rapidly becoming alienated from all Christian wor- 
ship and communion. 

' The fact,' says a recent writer, ^ may be explained 
as a passing fashion, or as the result of a certain 
phase of opinion, but it is a fact And its gravity 
is heightened by the circumsttoce that we meet it in 
men whose lives are pure, who exhibit least of the 
worldly self-seeking spirit, who are among the most 
thoughtful and cultivated. The conventional formu- 
lae of the indifference of the corrupt heart or of the 
love of earthly things are wholly insufficient to ex 
plain a state of mind than which none is fraught 
with greater danger/ 



12 TREFACE. 

This general unsettlement of religious belief, it 
is further remarked, has ' grown from within / the 
outcome of it is a scepticism reluctant rather than 
aggressive, which in some of the best men is rapidly 
passing the border of intellectual hesitation.' 

The secret of the success which now attends publi- 
cations intended to advance a destructive criticism 
is, that • they speak to men already ' perplext in 
faith, but pure in deeds,' who received with their 
first instruction in Christianity statements of doctrine 
which, in the time of mature reflection, appear to 
contradict the Divine instincts of justice, mercy, and 
truth, — the image of God's own eternity in the heart 
of man. These doctrines, taught as necessary infer- 
ences from, or as identical with the facts of Chris- 
tianity, were once acquiesced in as the creed of 
Christendom, but now, in not a few cases, repulsion 
follows the attempt to read and understand them by 
the light of reason and conscience.'"^ 

That it may be very difficult to render service to 
such persons without paining or perplexing timid 
and anxious spirits is but too probable ; but every- 
thing of a merely personal character ought surely 
to be risked by Christians on behalf of men and 
women who, even in their unbelief, ha've not cast 
off the reverential feeling for Scripture which they 
acquired in youth, and who are always willing to 
allow that to a Bible training they mainly owe the 
light and life in and by which they now see. 

* Contemporary Review, art. 'Indian Questions,' No. 1, p. 125. 



PREFACE. 13 

The following Correspondence will perhaps serve 
to explain the state of things to which reference has 
been made, better than any merely general observa- 
tions could do. 



March 1867. 



OOEEESPOlNrDEIsrCE. 



(I.) 

A LETTER. 



My dear 



Your request that I should lay frankly before you 
my views regarding the Bible, and that I should state dis- 
tinctly the particular diflficul ties which have led me to reject it, 
is certainly a reasonable one. Yet I can scarcely enter on 
the subject without pain ; nor would I pursue it, did I not 
feel rather desirous of explaining to you the true position of 
a multitude of young men who are but too often maligned or 
misunderstood. 

Regarding myself, I need only say that you have known me 
too long and too well to be in any danger of attributing my 
unbelief to moral perversion. My manner of life, from my 
youth up, has been no secret to you, and I have consequently 
little fear that you will so grossly misjudge me as to suppose 
that I have any wish to escape obligation by cherishing seep 
ticism, or any desire to justify lawlessness by denying Divine 
Law. But I wish to say a word or two on this point for 
oilers. 

The unbelievers of the present day, so far, at least, as I have 
come into contact with them, are not, as you seem to think, 



16 COERESPONDENCE. 

irreligious men. Thev are not mockers, neither do they sit in 
the seat of the scornful. Hundreds of them are, at the present 
hour, * wearying their souls to solve the problem how to con- 
ciliate the convictions to which the tendencies of the age have 
borne them with respect for time-honoured institutions, and 
tenderness for the faith of those whom they most love and 
honour.' 

You would be surprised to find how many of these have 
been educated evangelically ; how many of them are persons 
of pure minds, generous, benevolent, and self-denying ; how 
willing many of them are to admit that to the Christian edu- 
cation they have received they owe everything they possess. 

It is a mistake to imagine that all, or even the greater part, 
of these persons either deny the truth of Christianity, or 
shrink from avowing their conviction that Jesus Christ was 
the greatest and best being that ever dwelt on earth. They do 
not dispute that the Bible has, in many respects, a claim to be 
regarded as the first of books. What they deny is, its Divine 
character, its authority, its infallibility. They are conscious 
enough of the darkness which, apart from revelation, hangs 
over the world in which they live, but they do not see evidence 
that the Bible has removed that darkness. On the contrary, 
the more the world advances on its way, and the greater the 
extent of human knowledge, the deeper seems to them the 
gloom and mystery which encompasses all things. Life and 
Death they regard alike as unknown and unknowable. Shad- 
ows, in the view of some^ fall even on the character of God. His 
very existence is by such at times doubted. Whether, if 
existent, He is benevolent or malignant, they think cannot be 
proved. It is possible^ they say, when in these moods, that 
God is ; possible that He is good ; possible that after death, 
life may be renewed ; but nothing is certain. 

To afiirm that men who are in this state of mind are un- 
happy is often, but not always, true ; for the mind, like the 
eye, can accustom itself to darkness as well as to light, and 



A LETTER FROM A SCEPTIC. 17 

where absolute certainty cannot be obtained, the soul can 
find rest even in a bare possibility. 

Anything^y they think, is better than a Gospel, so called, 
which is in fact no g-ospel or good news at all, since it consigns 
all but a fraction of the human race to irremediable sorrow ; 
which exaggerates human sin, and limits Divine mercy ; which 
throws no sunshine on the dark spots that rest upon human- 
ity, and which brings no balm to those that need it most — the 
slaves of evil, of ignorance, and of superstition. 

As a rule, however, they have no wish to undermine the 
faith of others, and no desire to deprive anyone of consola- 
tions which are dear to him. Their spirit is critical, but not 
contemptuous; it is historic, not intolerant. They disbelieve 
in miracles, but they have no disposition to laugh at those who 
hold to them. That which is to believers a question of Life or 
Death is to them a matter of pure indifference. Where others 
are enthusiastic, they are calm and judicial. 

To these men I adhere. Their number is much greater than 
you think, and it is constantly increasing. They have their 
faults without doubt, but in this respect they are only on a par 
with their opponents. They may sometimes forget what is 
due to the cherished beliefs of wise and good men who have 
inherited the opinions of a dead past, but the rudeness is not 
wanton ; it arises from the absence of reverence for what 
others esteem to be Divine rather from any feeling of ani- 
mosity. Forgive them this wrong, and believe me when I say 
that whatever your opinion may be of any of us, our own con- 
viction is that we are doing a good work, that we are striving 
to establish the principle of freedom of enquiry, in opposition 
to that of acquiescence in dogmas utterly at variance, as we 
think, not only with the discoveries of science, but with the 
first principles of morality. 

"We are ready to avow our belief that the Bible is respon- 
sible for the prevalence of the dogmas to which we object, and 
therefore, ' while we admit the good that is to be found in it, 



1 8 CORRESPONDENCE. 

while we neither altogether reject or despise its teachings, we 
cannot allow it to be held in the estimation that has hitherto 
been accorded to it, nor can we permit either it or anything 
else to come between conscience and God.' 

We think that the Bishop of Natal has demonstrated that 
the Sacred Eecords, as they are called, are not, as a whole, 
historical, and therefore that the moral and spiritual proposi- 
tions contained in these books cannot be authoritative. When, 
therefore, we find in Scripture actions recorded and commend- 
ed which are immoral; commands given which are iniquitous ; 
and statutes ordained which are unjust ; we put them aside 
just as we should do if they were found in any other book. 
We maintain that many things in the Bible are untrue, and 
others morally wrong; among the latter we reckon the Mosaic 
laws regarding slavery, and the instructions given for the ex- 
termioation of whole tribes. We are amazed and confounded 
when we discern that some of these things have been pal- 
liated in the writings of a man so great and good as was Dr. 
Arnold, and that even Lord Macaulay should speak of the 
Jews as specially selected by God to be 'the ministers of His 
vengeance, and specially commanded by Him to do many 
things which, if done without His authority, would have been 
atrocious crimes.' The principle which underlies this demoral- 
ising process is, I need not say, more speciously, and therefore 
more perniciously, laid down by Bishop Butler in his * Anal- 
ogy.' 

On the general question of inspiration, my own notion is 
that it ought not to be regarded as anything peculiar to the 
past, since we are all, in a certain sense, inspired. All truly 
great men are unquestionably inspired men. On your own 
showing, every Christian is inspired who is made a partaker 
of the Holy Ghost. Do you not recognise this fact when you 
pray, ' Cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration 
of thy Holy Spirit ?' Do you not affirm it when you claim for 
tlie godly the promise of the Comforter — ' He shall guide you 



A LETTER FEOM A SCEPTIC. 19 

into all truth?' Can you, then, really believe that Biblical 
inspiration is anything more or less than the combination in 
the writers of the two fold gift — genius and piety ? I myself 
agree with Mr. F. W. Newman, when he says that only one 
kind of inspiration can be admitted, namely, that of ' an ordi- 
nary influence of the Divine Spirit on the hearts of men, which 
quickens and strengthens their moral and spiritual powers, and 
is accessible to all (in a certain stage of development) in some 
proportion to their own faithfulness.' Of course, this is but 
intuition, and, holding it, the value and importance of revela- 
tion in the Scriptures becomes very small indeed : but I cannot 
help that. 

Professor Strauss somewhat expresses my thought when he 
says that ' God has revealed Himself to mankind at all times 
— in their own minds, in the works of creation, in the history 
of the nations, and, finally, in some particularly gifted men 
whom He raised up as lawgivers and prophets, as teachers and 
apostles. Such men have risen among all nations, but chiefly 
amongst the Jews, who very early entertained the notion that 
there is but one God, that He is the Almighty Creator of 
heaven and earth, that He is not to be represented by any 
image or likeness, that He is the Holy Lawgiver, the just 
Kuler of the destinies of mankind. The religious writings of 
the ancient Jewish nation being the only ones in which this 
foundation of true religion is to be found so pure and strong 
(for which reason even the New Testament relies on and 
appeals to the Old in this respect) they are also holy to us ; and 
the books of Moses and Samuel, the Psalms, and the Prophets 
are indispensable to our edification. 

' But they are not trustworthy as records of actual facts. 
Several remarkable events undoubtedly happened to the Israel- 
itish nation, chiefly in the early period of their history ; they 
had escaped from servitude in Egypt under strange circum- 
stances, and after a long migration they had conquered the 
land of Canaan in bloody wars. These occurrences, of course, 



20 COBRESPO]:n)ENCE. 

continued to live in the mouths of the people from generation 
to generation. At length some pious Israelite, dwelling on 
the Divine activity with regard to the departure from Egypt, 
imagined it in the form in which it stands, as if God had 
ordered Moses in an oral conversation to deliver His people — 
osifYLQ had visibly, in the pillar of cloud and of fire, marched 
before the army, and so forth. This, written down in after 
times, is probably the real origin of the relations thereof in 
those writings that are commonly called the books of Moses.' 
In this way, that which is recorded in the Old Testament as 
supernatural may, I think, be accounted for. 

So with the I:Tew Testament. ' The first Christians natu- 
rally asked themselves whence in Christ comes this clearness 
of mind, this sublimity of spirit, this purity of heart which is 
nowhere else to be found in any human being ? He was not 
produced by sinful seed, was their answer ; He immediately 
descended from God, the fountain of all light. This most 
likely gave rise to the relations of His supernatural production 
contained in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke. As a 
higher spirit He appeared to have come down upon this earth 
for a short time ; after His departure from it He seemed to 
have returned to God, whence He came. This again gave rise 
to the relations of His resurrection and ascension, and so 
forth.' 

' Christ will indeed come back to judge the world ; only His 
coming to judge us is not one that is always delayed from cen- 
tury to century, and never takes place ; but the Lord passes 
judgment every day, for He has given His spirit into our hearts 
to judge us: punishing us when we are doing or coveting evil, 
and rewarding us with peace and happiness when we are guided 
and governed by it. And thus our inward judge — our con- 
science — purified and sharpened by the Spirit of Christ, is 
adjudging and preparing to us already in this life reward or 
punishment, happiness or sorrow, according to what we de- 
serve. This clearly indicates that also in a future life the 



A LETTER FROM A SCEPTIC. 21 

Divine Judge will assign to each of us that mansion in His 
Father's house which he has made himself worthy of here on 
earth. '^ 

I grant that, in one sense, under this mode of treatment, the 
Book goes, but in another it remains; remains 'to be read 
more intelligently than ever, not as the infallible Word of 
God, which it is not, but the fallible word of man, which it 
is ; read as containing a record, not of what God said and did, 
but of what the best minds in past ages thought God said and 
did. Truth in this way develops. The God of David is an 
improvement on the God of the book of Joshua. Isaiah's God 
is not like the God of Moses or of Abraham. The '^ Father " 
revealed by Jesus is holier, wiser, and purer than them all. 
Men will indeed have to give up the superstitions of other 
days — the dogmas that were accepted on trust — the dreams 
of dim ages past and gone ; but they will build on a surer 
foundation — they will have a nearer and a dearer faith in One 
who speaks to His faithful sons to-day ; and they will build 
their faith and hope on a better thing than an infallible book 
(even though they could have it), for they will build on an 
infallible God, who will give to all who seek Him the witness 
of His own blessed Spirit that " now are we the sons of God.'' 
Then we shall all see plainly that the Bible is our helper and 
not our master; that it belongs to the experience and the 
literature of the past ; and that while we reverence and study 
it, we are not to build all our hopes upon it, but that we are 
to trust to the same God as David and Jesus trusted in, that 
we may receive in the same way and to the same end, the 
wisdom that made them wise and the inspiration that made 
them good. The Bible is a book of the past, and it necessarily 
reflects the errors and the limited experience of the past.' ^ 

1 The opinions of Professor David Strauss, as embodied in his letter to tho 
Burgomaster Hirzell, Professor Orelli, and Professor Hitzig, at Zurich, translated 
And printed for general circulation as a tract. 

* ' The Light that Pains,' a tract printed for gratuitous distribution. 



22 COERESPONDENCE. 

But, apart from these views, many enquiries must be made 
before I can accept the Bible. Take the four Gospels for in- 
stance. How am I to know who wrote them, or when they 
were written ? How am I to ascertain what means of know- 
ledge the writers had, and whether or no they were eye- wit- 
nesses of what they record ? If they were not, I must be told 
how they got their information. These, and many similar 
questions, wliich you good people never seem to trouble your- 
selves about, appear to me to be essential and imperatively to 
require an answer. 

Do not, however, suppose, I pray you, that, being in this 
sceptical condition, I must of necessity be altogether destitute 
of serious piety. By no means. I can, and do still occa- 
sionally, worship both in the Established Church and among 
N'onconformists. What I agree with I unite in ; what I dissent 
from I leave unnoticed. My tastes lead me to prefer litur- 
gical to free prayer, and I cannot but think that one day we 
shall have forms for public devotion sufficiently aesthetic to 
gratify the religious sentiment, without involving dogmas 
which lead only to dispute. It certainly must be allowed that 
Christianity, whether in all respects true or not in the shape 
we have it, is eminently useful, highly consolatory to the 
poor and dependent, a restraint on many which could be ill 
spared, and an occasion of constant kindness and benevolent 
activity. 

Further, in the absence of individual conviction, Church 
authority, if not pressed too far, offers many advantages. 
Amid the restlessness and discomfort engendered by profitless 
enquiry, it is a satisfaction, in the absence of anything better, 
to admit the fact that the Church represents the belief of cen- 
turies, whether those beliefs be accurate or not ; and that con- 
fidence in her, whether well grounded or otherwise, at least 
ensures quiet, by pacifying where it may not satisfy, and by 
fostering habits the tendency of which must unquestionably be 
favorable to domestic happiness, to social comfort, and to the 



A LETTER FROM A SCEPTIC. 23 

interests of law and order among all classes in the common- 
wealth. 

Such is my case. I have been perfectly frank with you iu 
stating it, and I cannot but hope that you will answer mo 
in a similar spirit. 

Believe me to be, 

Yours cordially, 



(11.) 

THE KEPLY. 

My Deae , 

You do me but justice when you express confi- 
dence that I shall not attribute the intellectual wanderings of 
the son of my dearest friend to moral causes. I have no right 
to do this in any case. It is deeply to be regretted that be- 
lievers should so often be harsh in their judgments of those 
who, while honest and respectful in their treatment of Scrip- 
ture, are unable to arrive at settled convictions regarding its 
authority. Be assured that the highest faith is not favorable 
either to bigotry or uncharitableness. Confidence in the Bible, 
when it arises from supposed triumph in argument, or from a 
blind and hereditary acceptance of its claim, is, I am quite 
aware, but too often accompanied by an unloving and self- 
righteous feeling toward unbelievers ; but this fault is rarely 
found among persons who feel and acknowledge that their joy, 
in truth, is the result of a subjective experience of its value, 
derived from the source and fountain of all truth. And for 
obvious reasons. The faith which is subjective carries with it 
that sense of certainty which alone gives repose to the spirit— 
a repose favorable alike to humility and respect for the con- 
sciences of others, and every way out of harmony with either 
anger or arrogance. Only such a faith is, properly speaking. 
Divine ; for ' the light in which a man can no longer call man 
'' master " is light in which he can no longer desire to be 
called '^ master." He who has this faith will rarely venture 
to say when and how, and to what extent, his brother man is 
rebellious to light and guilty in respect of unbelief; will rarely 



26 COREESPOIS^DENCE. 

attempt to decide as to who is leaning to his own understand- 
ing, or who receiving the Kingdom of God as a little child.' ^ 

And now you must allow me to say that I think you have 
taken far too favourable a view of a class who seem to me any- 
thing hut models for sincere and serious enquirers. Honest 
doubt, honestly dealt with, is, I believe, mjurious to no one ; 
but doubt encouraged and indulged soon becomes a habit of 
the mind, and a very unwholesome one too, not unfrequently 
weakening, and sometimes destroying the very capacity for 
estimating moral evidence. It is by no means rare to meet 
with doubters who are so unreasonable in relation to their 
difficulties that, in dealing with them, one is more tempted to 
question the healthiness of the brain than the integrity of the 
purpose. It is ' the fool ' who says in his heart ' there is no 
God.' 

Some men of this stamp whom I have known were obviously 
under the influence of an intense and morbid egotism, and 
others were so completely in bondage to a sense of the ludi- 
crous that they seemed absolutely incapable of dealing with 
anything seriously^ which could, by a little perverted inge- 
nuity, be made to look grotesque. Few sceptics, I think, are 
distinguished by the possession of a robust and well-balanced 
intellect. I doubt not that among these persons are to be 
found many who may fairly claim to be regarded with the 
greatest consideration and respect. But this is not the case 
with all. As among believers are to be seen weak minds as 
well as strong ones ; bad men as well as good men ; persons 
who are able to give a sound reason for the hope that is in 
them, as well as persons who can give no reason at all : so 
among unbelievers there are not a few who but too plainly 
indicate that self-complacency and conceit have had very 
much to do with their doubts, while others are as clearly the 
victims of pride and a rebellious will — persons who are ob- 

* Thoughts on Eevelation, with Special Ecference to the Present Time. By 
John McLcod CampbcU. 



EEPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 27 

viously destitute of all reverence^ and perhaps it is not too 
much to say disbelievers alike in truth and goodness. All this 
may surely be allowed, without disputing for a moment what 
you have advanced in favour of your friends. 

In relation to your own difficulties, it will only be possible, 
in a brief letter like this, to glance generally at some consi- 
derations which you seem to me to have overlooked. 

Your views of inspiration are of course not mine. I cer- 
tainly regard Biblical inspiration — for I here speak of that 
only — as something very different from either genius or piety, 
whether single or combined. I do not think it at all akin to 
what we sometimes call the inspiration of the poet, of the 
painter, of the sculptor, or of the musician. I am far, indeed, 
from disputing that the Giver of every good and perfect gift 
may justly be regarded as endowing men of genius with all 
that distinguishes them from their fellows, but when I speak 
of Holy Scripture as inspired I use' the word in a much higher 
sense than this. I regard that book — so far as it is God- 
breathed at all — as inspired in such an exceptional way as to 
remove its revelations altogether out of the rank, even of the 
highest of merely human compositions. 

I admit, indeed, that you would have good ground for 
maintaining the continuance of inspiration amongst us, if your 
application of the text quoted was a right one. But it is not 
so. It is a very serious and mischievous mistake to apply the 
words, ' He shall guide you into all truth,' to every believer. 
To do so, except in a ^oery limited seiise^ is, in my judgment, to 
destroy the broadest distinction that can be pointed out 
between inspired and uninspired communications. I am 
always ashamed at the arrogance — however disguised as 
humility — which is implied when good men say, as many do, 
' the Holy Spirit has taught me this or that ; God fulfils His 
promise, and guides me into all truth ;' when they ought to 
say, ' God has revealed in the Bible all truth needful for my 
salvation from evil, and for my spiritual growth. Just as I 



28- COKKESPONDENCE. 

come to that book in a riglit spirit, free from pride and preju- 
dice, from selfishness and sectarianism ; not governed by in- 
ferior motives, not moved by the desire that such or such an 
opinion of mine may be confirmed by Scripture, but only 
anxious to know what the Book says ; in other words, jnst so 
far as I am purified by the Spirit of God, and my will is 
brought into harmony with the Divine will, shall I attain wis- 
dom. On the other hand, just in proportion as I come to the 
written word under the influence of evil, of self-will, of bigotry, 
or of given theological systems, shall I be liable to delusion 
and darkness. That which was promised to the Apostles was 
not, in the same sense^ promised to me. The Lord led them 
into all truth, ly direct revelation, that they might be the 
instructors of the Church in all ages. The Lord will lead me 
into all truth, only by the subjection of my will — by giving mo 
instructors of the Church in all ages. The Lord will lead mu 
into all truth, only by the subjection of my will — by giving me 
a loving, candid, and fearless spirit; by purifying and eleva- 
ting my moral nature, and by bringing me in this state of mind 
into heartfelt contact with the revelations of Scripture.' 

These are my views ; and I wish you to believe that, in 
holding them, I am anything but insensible to the difiiculties 
which embarrass us, in presenting what may be regarded by 
men in general as satisfactory proof of many things that we 
often take 'for granted, such as miracles, the authorship and 
authenticity of the*four Gospels, the formation of the canon, 
and much beside. I hope, before long, to lay before you some 
thoughts by which you will see how these things present 
themselves to my own mind. 

I am, I confess, greatly astonished to find that you should 
be able, with the amount of natural good sense you possess, 
to accept Strauss's ideological theory, and to content yourself 
with the assumption tliat from some unknown cause or other 
— for a special revelation is denied — the Jews, although every 
way inferior in general culture to the surrounding nations, 
were, even in the very earliest times, immeasurably before 
others in the knowledge of God ; so much so, that the writers 



REPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 29 

of the New Testament properly * rely upon and appeal' to 
them in this respect ; nay, that we ourselves, with equal pro- 
priety, regard some portions at least of Jewish literature as 
' holy and indispensable to edification.' We believers say so 
too, and our reasons for thus judging — whatever they may be 
worth — are before the world. But what are yours ? The 
books themselves, according to your view, while professing to 
be historical, are really not so ; the writers, whoever they 
might be, are confessedly untrustworthy, for while they 
broadly and repeatedly assert that such and such things are 
facts, they, in reality, only imagined them. What these ' pious 
Israelites ' assert to have received directly from God they 
really invented in order to account for things they could not 
otherwise explain. When they affirm in the most unmistake- 
able terms that certain miraculous occurrences took place, such 
as the presence of the pillar of cloud and the passage of the 
Red Sea, they only * imagined the Divine activity,' and wrote 
as if the events had actually transpired ; tJiis^ you say, is the 
real origin of the relations given in the writings commonly 
called the Books of Moses. In like manner the narratives of 
the New Testament are but evolutions of human thought, 
utterly untrue if presented as facts, yet true as relations of 
what ' the best minds in past ages thought G-od said and did.' 

The theory further supposes that when these early intuitions 
took shape, and were by somebody or other formed into a 
book, and ultimately accepted as national annals, the compilers 
or inventors gained their end by moulding the whole into a 
history the very reverse of what might reasonably have been 
expected on the supposition that the object was to present 
documents likely to be pleasing. For what is this Jewish his- 
tory as we have it, whether true or false, but a record of early 
degradation, of continued ingratitude, of perversity, obstinacy, 
and crime ? Of the early judges one (Ehud) is represented as 
an assassin ; another (Abimelech), the son of a concubine, i? 
said to have murdered all his family, and to have been cruel 



30 CORRESPONDENCE. 

enough ou one occasion to have hurnt alive ahout a thousand 
helpless captives, men and women ; a third (Jephthah) in civil 
strife slajs above 40,000 of his countrymen ; a fourth (Sam- 
son) is but a half-civilized giant ; and the state of the country 
generally is at one period morally degraded to such an extent 
that one entire tribe — Benjamin — had to be all but extirpated. 
Again, what an unsatisfactory history is that of Saul ! What 
dark stains rest on David ! What a sad ending is that of 
Solomon ! What a catalogue of sins and idolatries defaces the 
glory of succeeding monarchs ! Granting, for the sake of 
argument, that Ezra and his scribes, instead of finding the 
records said to have been discovered, invented them, this, at 
least, follows : that such a history, if not felt to be as true as 
it was humiliating, would certainly have excited popular in- 
dignation and been rejected at once. 

I am bound, however, to suppose that you really believe the 
narratives of Scripture to be in^centions^ and that you also 
believe in their utility and in the piety of the men who set 
them afloat, for you say you do ,• but I could not have accepted 
such a statement on any authority short of your own. For 
wliat does it involve ? Certainly this — that falsehoods are not 
only innocent but useful, ' absolutely edifying ;' that men may 
be, at one and the same time, untrustworthy and yet 'pious ;' 
that ' the best minds in past ages ' were justified in putting 
forth what they had only thought^ as what they had seen and 
heard ; in afiirming that their subjective feelings were actual 
and objective facts. I am quite willing to admit that a super- 
natural revelation has its difficulties ; but were those difificul- 
ties ten times greater or more numerous than they are, 
they would not approach the contradictions which are in- • 
separable from the theory you have adopted. Talk about 
the moral difficulties of the Bible, why they shrink into abso- 
lute insignificance when compared with an hypothesis which 
annihilates all distinction between right and wrong, truth and 
falsehood, giving, in fact, to falsehood the moral power of 
truth, to wrong-doing the efficacy of that which is right. 



REPLY TO THE DOUBTEE. 31 

You will perhaps say this is not fair ; that it is surely pos- 
sible for a man to idealize honestly, and, more than this, to 
present ideal thought to himself and to others with all the 
vividness and force of objective reality, without thereby 
becoming either a cheat or a charlatan. 1 admit that such a 
case is possible, but not in relation to the narratives of Scrip- 
ture. M. Eenan has been attempting this feat very lately, in 
relation to the Eesurrection, and never was there a more 
signal failure. Facts, as has been well said, * will not bend to 
this process.' There never were narratives less ideal or more 
straightforward in their reality ; they might have been pur- 
posely framed to contrast with professed accounts of visions, 
and to exclude the possibility of their being confounded with 
such accounts. The recitals show little care to satisfy our 
curiosity, or to avoid the appearance of inconsistency in de- 
tail ; but nothing can be more removed from vagueness and 
hesitation than their definite, positive statements. It is not 
criticism, but mere arbitrary license, to say that these facts 
stand for fancies. The very notion is trifling and incredible. 
We may disbelieve if we will ; but to endeavour to make out 
that plain assertions are visions, is but to take refuge in the 
most unlikely of guesses.^ 

There is no fact in history more certain than that Jesus 
Christ appeared in Judea at the time He is said to have done, 
that He was crucified, that He was believed by His disciples 
to have risen from the dead, that ' many professing to have 
been original witnesses of that event and of the Christian 
miracles generally, passed their lives in labours, dangers, and 
sufferings voluntarily undergone in attestation of the accounts 
which they delivered, and solely in consequence of their belief 
of the truth of those accounts."^ May I not add, and call you 
and your friends as witnesses, that motives connected with 
these beliefs have in all ages elevated and ennobled those who 

1 Saturday Eeview, art. on Kenan's Des Ap6tres. 

2 Paley's Evidence, tnotto to cap. ii.-ix. 



32 COREESPOl^DENCE. 

have received them into their hearts with simplicity and love ? 
The theory of Strauss is absolutely worthless. 

And now for your assertion that in the Bible may be found 
commands which are immoral and iniquitous, such as those 
which direct the massacre of the Oanaanites and sanction 
cruelty to slaves. 

Let us take first the slaughter of the Oanaanites. What I 
have to show, according to you, is that since God did com- 
mand the destruction of these people. He w^as riglit in doing 
so. To this, however, I demur. In accepting the Pentateuch 
as historically true, I am simply bound to show, first, that the 
assertion of a Divine command to the Israelites to take posses- 
sion of Canaan Ijy force^ is inseparable from the rest of the 
narrative ; aiid then to state the limitations under which, as 
I imagine, such phrases as 'The Lord said' or 'The Lord 
spake ' ought to be received. 

I do not myself think Lord Macaulay's way of putting the 
matter, althoiigli a very common, is a right one. I see no 
evidence either that the Jews were (except in an indirect and 
limited sense) ' the ministers of God's vengeance,' or that they 
had a commission to extirpate the nations of Canaan. Least 
of all can I admit that they were ' specially commanded by 
God to do many things which, if done without His authority, 
would have been atrocious crimes.' Eight and wrong are not 
different things in God and man, nor can even the Divine 
Being rightfully do to-day what He Himself declared to be 
wrong yesterday, for right is always and eternally right. 

The argument that such or such a proceeding appears to us, 
when judged 'by the light of the Gospel^ to be unjust, cruel, or 
any way wrong, is a very sound one for doubting whether God 
ever sanctioned it — a powerful reason for demanding good 
evidence that He did so ; but it reaches no further. If it can 
be satisfactorily shown that God did really command this or 
that thing to be done, we must bow in silence ; unless, indeed, 
we mean, with our limited faculties, and still more limited 



REPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 33 

knowledge, to set ourselves up as wiser or better than our 
Maker. I cannot, however, admit for a moment that, whether 
commanded by God or not, the conquest of Canaan b^the 
.'Israelites was in itself an atrocious crime, except on the theory 
which neither you nor I hold to, that war for purposes of con- 
quest is, under all circumstances, criminal. 

But the question for our consideration is : Did God, in very 
deed, command the massacre of the Oanaanites? A prior 
question of course arises, which is this : When God communi- 
cates His will to man, does He do it in such a way as not only 
to render mistake as to the command itself impossible, but 
also to secure infallibility as to the means employed in its 
execution ? 

To neither of these questions can an absolutely affirmative 
reply be given. Admitting — which we certainly must, if we 
hold to the Book — that God spake unto Moses, Joshua, and 
Samuel, intelligiMy, whether revealing His character, or com- 
manding certain things to be done, we are nevertheless alto- 
gether in the dark as to tlie mode in which this was accom- 
plished. We cannot get beyond the Apostolic statement, that 
the same God who hath 'in these Jatter days spoken unto us 
by His Son,' did ' at sundry times and in divers manners speak 
unto the fathers by the prophets ' (Heb. i. 1). 

But, accepting this statement, what follows ? Why clearly 
this : that as a true apprehension of the message of ' the Son' 
is made dependent on the state of the heart of each individual 
to whom it comes, so must it be with eijery message God gives 
or sends to the children of men. Eminently is this the case 
when the communication relates to anything that has to he 
done ly man. Paul had to withstand Peter as a man to be 
blamed in relation to the particular course he was pursuing in 
doing God's work. Moses, in fulfilling a Divine command, 
sinned grievously ; nor is there the slightest reason to suppose 
that any servant of God is, or ever was, free from liabihty to 
error in executing the Divine will, if pride or ambition, or 
2* 



34 COEEESPONDENCE. 

selfish passion in any form, mingles with the work. Before, 
therefore, we ' charge God foolishly ' with sanctioning wrong, 
letils he quite sure that He commanded the thing to be done 
in the way it was. 

The ordinary impression seems to be that a constant and 
direct intercourse went on between the early rulers of the Jews 
and their Heavenly King, under which error was impossible ; 
that every act of the government was directed and regulated 
by intimations from above ; that the judges or governors of 
Israel were but the passive recipients of Divine instructions ; 
that the obedience rendered was therefore, to a great extent, 
mechanical, leaving little, if any, place for the judgment of .the 
statesman. Something like this is commonly held by persons 
who, without much reflection, think and speak of the people 
of Israel as placed under a theocratic government. But such 
a view of things cannot be sustained from Scripture. On the 
contrary, there can be no question as to the fact that intima- 
tions of the Divine will, as to what the Jews should do under 
given circumstances, always left room for wisdom or folly in 
the execution, for judgment or want of judgment in the ruler, 
for partial or entire obedience in the people. 

The distinctions commonly drawn by Christian writers 
between the old dispensation and the new, generally involve 
error in the way of exaggerating differences. Lord Bacon 
asserts- broadly that ' Prosperity is the blessing of the old Tes- 
tament ; but that adversity is the blessing of the ISTew.' Arch- 
bishop Whately, annotating on this observation, remarks : 
' The distinguishing characteristic of the old covenant, of the 
Mosaic Law, was, that it was enforced by a system of temporal 
rewards Siiid judgments^ administered according to an extraor- 
dinary (miraculous) providence. The Israelites were promised 
as the reward of obedience, long life, and health, and plentiful 
harvests, and victory over their enemies. And the punish- 
ments threatened for disobedience were pestilence, famine, 
defeat, and all kinds of temporal calaraitv. These were the 



REPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 35 

rewards and punishments that formed the sanction of tlie Mo- 
saic law. But the new covenant, the G-ospel, held out as its 
sanction, rewards and punishments in the next world, and 
these only.' 

Facts, however, do not bear out these statements, except with 
many limitations. Asaph was so perplexed by observing the 
prosperity of the wicked in life, and their tranquillity in death, 
contrasting^ as he saw it did, with the frequent misfortunes of 
the righteous, that he could get no peace until he went into 
the house of God and meditated on their latter end (at the day 
of judgment). And, on the other hand, certainly nothing can 
be more true than your assertion that God is judging us all 
every day, sometimes rewarding and sometimes inflicting pun- 
ishment, according to a man's obedience or disobedience. 

The truth is, we commonly fall in this matter into a double 
mistake. We are foolish enough to think that because the 
action of God is not always obvious to us. He has now less to 
do with the world's affairs than He once had. We exaggerate 
the extent of His interference in former times, because it related 
more than it does now to the outward and visible. We ought 
to remember that at no time does God manifest Himself more 
frequently or more directly than is needful, while at all times 
He leaves us to apply the principles He has laid down to prac- 
tical life, as a part of our probation, a course which of necessity 
involves the possibility of error on our side. 

The declaration, 'The Lord said,' 'The Lord spake,' or 
phrases of similar import, occur probably a hundred times in 
the Pentateuch alone, and in by far the greater part of these 
cases the words are used, not as asserting in each separate 
case a direct and immediate Divine revelation, but as implying 
the settled convictions of the speaker as to the Divine will. 
They denote in these cases the application of Divine statements 
to gl^en circumstances, by good, but human and therefore 
fallible, men. Further, we are strangely apt to forget that 
'the severity' of God is far more seen in His dealings with 



36 COERESPONDENCE. 

the cliosen people than with their enemies. In the wilderness, 
on one occasion, fourteen thousand die of plague, on account 
of transgression. On another, many perish by the sword. On 
a third, the earth opens and swallows up offenders. On a 
fourth, fiery serpents are sent in punishment; while the fright- 
ful calamities brought upon Judea by the Eomans, to say 
nothing of the previous overthrow of Jerusalem by the Chal- 
deans — all these events being distinctly put before us as judi- 
cial — involved miseries quite as great as any that the Oanaan- 
ites suffered. 

In relation to these nations, the assumption almost always 
made is, that God commanded their entire extirpation on 
account of their crimes. But this is not sustained by the 
narrative. The comonand is, • Thou shalt drii:)e them out before 

thee Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor 

with their gods. They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they 
make thee sin against Me.' (Exod. xxiii. 32-33.) 'Ye shall 
destroy their altars, break their images, -and cut down their 
groves : lest thou take of their daughters to thy sons, and go 
a- whoring after their gods.' (Exod. xxxiv. 11-17.) The^rc>- 
mise^ renewed from time^ to time, is : 'I will send hornets 
before thee, which shall drive out the Hivite, the Oanaanite, 
and the Hittite from before thee.' Again : ' I w\\\ send an 
angel before thee ; and I loill drive out the Oanaanite.' (Exod. 
xxxiii. 2.) Further, a« a fact ^ 'multitudes of them did flee, 
some into Africa, and others into Greece. Procopius says 
they first retreated into Egypt, but gradually advanced into 
Africa, where they built many cities.' ^ They were never 
destroyed, except when their evil influence could not in any 
other way be got rid of. 

When the Israelites /b-M^/A^^, they naturally adopted the ordi- 
nary hiws of war — the only laws which prevailed in tlieir 
time — and, in accordance therewith, they slew or madflblaves 
of their enemies. Had the Canaanites been the conquerors, they 
would, in like manner, have slain or enslaved the Israelites. 

1 Oalmet, edited by Taylor. 



KEPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 37 

*But,' you will saj, ^ the Lord, according to the Bible, com- 
manded the slaughter of women and children.' This, how- 
ever, is not as clear as at first sight it seems to he. The first 
instance in which this practice occurs is in the case of the 
Midianites, who had brought such grievous calamities on Israel 
by seducing the people to idolatry and immorality, in order 
that they might offend God. (Numb. xxv. 1-18 and xxxi. 16.) 
Here they, in the first instance, slew only the kings of Midian 
and their warriors. Moses, however, is wroth at this forbear- 
ance, and commands the execution of all the male children and 
of all the women who were not virgins. That the great law- 
giver was justified in so doing we have no right to assume. 
His motive was doubtless the preservation of the people, but 
he does not appear to have had any Divine sanction for this 
severity. (Numb. xxxi. 14-20.) A little later we have a 
recital of the general direction to ' drive out ' all the inhabi- 
tants, and to "• destroy all their pictures and images,' but no- 
thing is said about killing the people. (Numb, xxxiii. 52-56.) 
This direction had, however, been exceeded by the Israelites, 
for when Sihon, king of the Amorites, refused to let them 
pass, they destroyed all they overcame, even the women and 
the little ones. In thus acting, they but too plainly imitated 
the habits of the nations by which they were surrounded. 

Once embarked in this ruthless course, they pursued it in 
the case of Og, king of Bashan, as well as with others. Moses 
certainly approves this slaughter in his address at Horeb, giv- 
ing as the reason the prevention of intermarriages, and conse- 
quent idolatry. (Deut. vii. 1-11 and xx. 16-18.) Joshua fol- 
lows the example at Jericho (Josh. vi. 21) ; at Ai (viii. 25) ; 
at Lachish, at Debir, and in other places (x. 40). But it is 
here to be remarked, that this course is only taken with those 
tribes who came into battle. It is evident that the Canaanites 
might have made peace if they would, for it is remarked, 
' There was not a city that made peace with the children of 
Israel, save the inhabitants of Gibeon.' 



8 8 COREESPONDENOE. 

If Moses, in the address referred to, was infallible — if he 
was but the mouthpiece of God in the directions he gives to 
save alive of the seven nations 'nothing that breatheth' — it 
is clearly not for us to dispute the command; but if, as Dr. 
Pje Smith has put it, ' the sanction of the New Testament to 
the inspiration of the Old extends only to ' holy things,' and 
that ' to attach it to other things is to lose sight of its nature, 
and to misapply its design,' it is at least an open question 
whether this was the case. That God was not "pledged^ so to 
speak, to extirpate the Oanaanites, although He supernaturally 
assisted the Israelites in obtaining possession of the land, is 
clear from the fact that the worlc was not done wherever it was 
unnecessary. Miraculous aid, indeed, appears to have been 
withheld after the primary end — possession of the land — 
had been attained. "VYe are distinctly told that the children 
of Israel could not drive out the Jebusites. (Josh. xv. 63.) 
And, again, ' The Lord was with Judah, and he (Judah) drave 
out the inhabitants of the mountain ; but could not drive out 
the inhabitants of the valley, hecause they had chariots of iron.'' 
(Judg. i. 19.) In other cases, when the Israelites became 
strong enough to conquer, they not only refrained from slaugh- 
ter, making the people tributary, and dwelling among them, 
but intermarried, became idolatrous, and forsook the God of 
their fathers. (Judg. iii. 5-7.) As a consequence of this apos- 
tasy, they became themselves, from time to time, slaves : first, 
to the king of Mesopotamia (iii. 8), then to the Moabites (iii. 
14), then to the Oanaanites (iv. 2, 3), and then to the Midian- 
ites (vi. 1). During all these years, Israel enjoyed the Divine 
help only at long intervals, and then providentially rather than 
theocratically, since it was by the raising up of men as deliver- 
ers who were sometimes anything but good or godly. 

You will perhaps say I have purposely omitted any notice 
of a case which cannot be explained by the foregoing consider- 
ations, viz., that of the Amalekites destroyed by Saul under 
the directions of Samuel. (1 Sam. xv. 2, 3.) The prophet 



EEPLY TO THE DOIJBTER. 39 

here certainly claims to speak for God, when he says to Saul, 
' Go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, 
and spare them not ; but slay both man and woman, infant 
and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.' The command 
appears to have been executed, except in so far as Agag him- 
self was concerned and the cattle. For saving these, Saul is 
rejected from being king over Israel (xv. 23). 

The question arises, Did Samuel, in issuing this command, 
act by the immediate direction of God, or was the order given 
under an erroneous impression that in this act of destruction 
he was but carrying out a Divine threatening, and justifiably 
accomplishing a great work of retribution? Probably the lat- 
ter. He believed, doubtless, that he was but uttering the 
Divine Will when he said, ' Hearken thou unto the voice of 
the words of the Lord,' and yet it is anything but certain that 
he was right in thus speaking. He was evidently not infallible 
or quite free from secondary motives in what he did as the 
representative of God, or he would not have appointed his sons 
judges — men ' who turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, 
and perverted judgment.' (1 Sam. viii. 3.) He was now old, 
and if he erred in the one instance why should he not in the 
other? Besides, it is not a little remarkable that while he 
tells Saul that God had, on account of this act of disobedience^ 
rejected him from being king, he had, before this occur rence^ 
deposed the son of Kish for offering sacrifice without authority 
(xiii. 13, 14). 

That there was not the same degree of personal superintend- 
ence, so to speak, on the part of the Divine Being over the 
Israelites, after the making of the golden calf, as there had 
been before, is evident from the word of the Lord to Moses on 
that occasion : ' Go, lead the people into the place of which I 
have spoken unto thee : behold mine Angel ' (as distinguished 
from the more immediate presence of God which had hitherto 
been enjoyed) * shall go before thee.' (Exod. xxxii. 34.) It 
has been supposed by some that this was reversed on the inter- 



40 CORRESPONDENCE. 

cession of Moses (xxxiii. 12-17), but such does not appear to 
have been the case. The 'presence' of the Lord with the 
angel is all that is promised. The probability is, that, step by 
step, the more immediate interference of God was exchanged 
for ordinary providential government, as the people gradually 
assumed the position and responsibilities of an organised na- 
tion. If this be true, the likelihood of the command to destroy 
Amalek being given by Samuel rather than by God is greatly 
increased. 

It is clear enough that none of the judges were ' perfect 
before God.' Samson's conduct speaks for itself. Gideon kills 
Zeba and Zalmunna, saying he would have saved them alive if 
they had not killed his brothers. (Judges viii. 19.) Jephthah 
and Gideon^ Deborah and Barak, in like manner, are seen to 
act in a spirit and under motives which are far from being un- 
mixed. Samuel, like them, was liable to err ; nor does this 
conclusion at all interfere with the apostolic declaration that 
^ through faith ' these very men ' subdued kingdoms, wrought 
righteousness, obtained promises, and (figuratively) stopped 
the mouths of lions.' (Heb. xi. 32.) Great faith is not un- 
frequently accompanied, especially in warriors, by great defects 
and grievous deficiencies. 

By drawing a distinction, then, between what God clearly 
commanded, and what men actually did, the difficulty created 
by the massacre of the Oanaanites in great measure v-anishes ; 
the Jews cease to be ' ministers of Divine vengeance,' and 
crimes committed find no excuse in Divine commands. The 
wickedness of the Oanaanites might well justify their expul- 
sion — a wickedness so great and so seductive, that, in order to 
prevent its spread, ' the Lord went before ' both the children 
of Lot and the cliildren of Esau, driving out the offenders, just 
as He did before the children of Israel. (Dent. ii. 21, 22.) 

And now let us look at the question of slavery. As to its 
permission at all it must be remembered that neither under 



REPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 41 

the old covenant nor under the new, does God ever appear to 
do more than establish principles, which, at the proper time, 
and when men are somewhat prepared for change, are sure to 
overthrow existing wrongs. Slavery, polygamy, the gladia- 
torial shows, feudalism, and many other evils, have all in turn 
fallen by processes which were slow in operation, but sure as 
to their result. The Israelites, it must be recollected, although 
a chosen people, had been long slaves in Egypt, and when they 
came out they were at best but a sort of half savage mob, 
although wonderfully organized. The legislation both of the 
wilderness and of the promised land is, in all cases, adapted 
to the men as they then were^ and to the world as it existed at 
that time. The slaughter or the slavery of conquered tribes 
was the rule everywhere. Tyranny and oppression of the 
grpssest kind was practised by every neighbouring people with- 
out restriction or rebuke. 

The Israelite alone was under a law which required him to 
defend the weak, and to carry out with more or less stringency 
the great principle of love to all men. To what an extent he 
failed to do this we know too well ; but we are in no position 
whatever fitting us to judge as to the merit or demerit of any 
enactment intended, not for all time, but for a peculiar people, 
and for these only at a particular period of their history. All 
revelation is of necessity progressive. It grows with the 
growth of ages. vV^isdom always adapts itself to different 
times and to different conditions of men. It is only so far as 
the eye of the mind is opened by experience and discipline 
that it can take in the truth which is presented to it. 

It is easy to seize, as Dr. Oolenso has done, upon a single 
enactment, such as that recorded in Exodus (xxi. 21), where, 
if, after a severe beating, the slave survived a day or two, the 
master was to escape punishment, and, assuming it to be a 
Divine Law, to enlarge on the cruelty it seems to sanction ; 
but in so doing some things are taken for granted, and other 
things are forgotten. First, it by no means follows that be- 



42 CORRESPONDENCE. 

cause God governed Judea theocraticallj He is, so to speak, to 
be made responsible for every enactment found in the laws of 
Moses. A greater lawgiver than Moses, indeed, never arose ; 
a man more richly endowed with gifts and graces fitting him 
for the precise work he had to do never lived ; but these very 
gifts prove that he was not a mere passive recipient of Divine 
instructions. He was left, without doubt, in many matters 
of detail to judge and act as he saw best for the people he had 
to govern. 

A distinction is clearly drawn between the giving of the ten 
commandments and the Mosaic Law generally. Regarding 
the first, it is said, ' the Lord spake unto you out of the midst 
of the fire.' Re ' declared unto you His commandments; and 
He wrote them upon two tables of stone.' Eegarding the last, 
^ The Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes 
and judgments.' (Deut. iv. 12-14.) 

Why, too, should we shut our eyes to the fact that ' many 
of the rites prescribed appear to have been taken from those 
of the Egyptians ? The linen garments of the priests, the 
long hair of the Fazarites, the offering of the first fruits, and 
similar ordinances, betray an Egyptian origin. All were re- 
jected that savoured of, or countenanced idolatry, or were 
unsuitable to the national character and state of the Israelites. 
The wisdom of not introducing new rites and customs is 
obvious. The people, rude and uncultivated as they were, 
would have been reluctant to observe strange regulations. 
They adhered with pertinacity to what they had learned and 
seen. Hence we perceive the propriety of retaining as many 
old ordinances and ceremonies as were adapted to the purpose 
which God had in view by giving the Levitical law.'^ 

Further, it should be borne in mind that, by the very same 

law that is pronounced so cruel, it was provided that if the 

slave died under his master's hand the blood of the man should 

surely be avenged. This was a provision which would tend 

1 Davidson's Text of the Old Testament Considered, second ed. pp. 582-8. 



REPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 43 

powerfully to check any rigour which was accompanied by 
such a risk. As a fact, the Hebrew slave, whether reduced 
to this condition by criminality, or bought with money of the 
stranger, was incalculably better cared for than he would have 
been among any other people. If a Hebrew^ his servitude 
terminated at the end of six years. (Exod. xxi. 2.) His mas- 
ter was admonished to treat him while in bondage ' as an hired 
servant,' and 'not to rule over him with rigour.' (Lev. xxv. 
89-43.) War captives, such as the Oanaanites or others, as 
well as those purchased from foreign dealers, were protected 
by statutes unknown elsewhere. The loss of an eye or a 
tooth was to be recompensed by giving the slave his liberty 
(Exod. xxi. 26, 2T), and his wilful murder entailed the same 
punishment as in the case of a free man. (Lev. xxiv. 17-22.) 

On the whole, it can scarcely be disputed that slavery, as 
Mr. Bevan suggests in his article in Smith's Dictionary, was 
in the Mosaic law recognised mainly ' with a view to mitigate 
its hardships. In that phase of society which prevailed when 
these laws were made,' he remarks, 'slavery was commonly 
the alternative of death in the case of all who were captured 
in battle. A labouring class, in our sense of the word, was 
almost unknown to the nations of antiquity ; hired service was 
regarded as incompatible with freedom ; the slave, as a rule, 
occupied the same social position as the servant or labourer 
of modern times, though differing from him in regard to 
political status.' There is nothing whatever in the Mosaic 
laws relating to slavery, when candidly and comprehensively 
considered, which in the slightest degree justifies doubt as to 
the Pentateuch being what it professes to be — a true delinea- 
tion of God's dealings with His ancient people. 

And now let us pass on to other subjects. As I have 
already observed, T perfectly agree with you when you say 
that the Lord judges us every day; but I am quite at a loss to 
understand on what ground you can affirm that Christ ' will 
come 'back to judge the world,' since you neither believe that 



44: COERESPONDENCE. 

God has appointed a day (a fixed time) for that purpose, or 
that He who is to be the judge of men has been raised from 
the dead. Denying the resurrection of Christ as an objective 
fact, how can you hold that He will come back? Eefusing to 
accept what the Bible says as to the beginning of the world, 
and rejecting also what it affirms regarding the end of it, it is 
plain that in your view ' all things^ continue as they were 
from the beginning of the creation ' (2 Pet. iii. 4, 5), and, for 
anything you know to the contrary, will so continue for ever. 
A comforting thought, truly, to anyone who contemplates the 
sin and misery, the oppression and wrong, of which earth is 
the theatre, and a thought which is certainly not much allevi- 
ated by the possibility of improvement through material 
agencies; for hitherto 'progress' has brought with it almost 
as many sorrows as joys, by no means perceptibly increasing 
the sum of human happiness. Ah ! my dear friend, hide it as 
you may, unbelief is but another word for darkness and despair. 
You continue to speak, I perceive, of the ' witness of the 
^ Spirit,' and about being a ' son of God ;' but how you can use 
such terms, or arrive at any assurance that your faith and 
hope, such as they are, rest on a good foundation, while aban- 
doning Scripture, I am at a loss to imagine ; for apart from 
the Divine revelation which you reject, no ray of light falls 
upon our path. You may tell me that a blind man has, ly 
intuition^ the same image on his eye of hill and dale, tree and 
flower, sun and stars, that I have, but I cannot believe you. 
I should insist that such a person must have once seen, or that 
if not recollections^ his supposed intuitions were but concep- 
tions originating in the descriptions of others. So, until I find 
a man brought up in the darkness of heathenism and alto- 
gether unacquainted with Scripture, possessing by immediate 
revelation from God a sense of sonship, a witness of the Spirit, 
and a faith and hope akin thereto, I must decline to admit that 
the case you have put is other than a mere imagination. ' To 
affirm that each man at once, by internal illumination alone, 



REPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 45 

attains a clear recognition of even elementary moral and 
spiritual truth, is to ignore the laws according to which the 
sonl's activity is developed, and to contradict universal ex- 
perience, which tells us that the great majority of mankind 
are but in partial possession of this spiritual and moral truth, 
and hold it, for the most part, in connection with the most 
prodigious and pernicious errors.'^ 

I must here, however, allow that you are to some extent 
right in saying that the Gospel, as ordinarily preached, exag- 
gerates human sin and limits Divine mercy. It exaggerates 
evil however, only in so far as it abandons the record ; only in 
so far as it equalises transgression of all kinds, by measuring 
the guilt of sin, not as God does^ by the circumstances under 
which it is committed — such as the ignorance or weakness 
of the sinner— but by the glory of the Creator, and the dig- 
nity of the Divine Redeemer. It limits mercy only in so far 
as it makes — without any Scriptural authority for so doing — 
the possiMlity of pardon to depend on conditions which can 
only be fulfilled by the comparatively few who here become ac- 
quainted with the Gospel ; only in so far as it teaches that the 
redeeming love of tlie Saviour cannot be of any practical bene- 
fit except to the elect. The Bible is surely not responsible for 
these or any other perversions, nor must the inferences of man 
be confounded with the revelations of God. 

My letter is unduly lengthening, but I cannot leave entirely 
unnoticed your expectation — shall I not say hope ? — that one 
day we shall have 'forms of public devotion suflficiently aesthetic 
to gratify the religious sentiment, without involving dogmas 
that lead only to dispute.' You will perhaps be surprised if I 
tell you that I think this very possible. But, believe me, it 
will only be when Christendom, so long apostate, has, in retri- 
bution for her abominations, become absolutely atheistic. 

That a tendency of this kind manifests itself, from time to 
time, in Eome, especially among the Jesuits, has been noticed 

1 The Eclipse of Faith: a Visit to a Religious Sceptic, p. 297. 



46 CORRESPONDENCE. 

by devout Catholics, and is regarded by them with grief and 
anxiety. ^It is well known,' says a Catholic writer (probably 
belonging to the Eastern branch), ' that the Jesuits assisted, or 
rather guided the Pope, in bringing out the last dogma of the 
immaculate conception of Mary. They acted with foresight, 
since they exalted the external veneration of the blessed 
Virgin, which latter rests on Mary's justification and sanctifi- 
cation through the redeeming merits of Christ — and they were 
thus enabled to help on still further the externalising of Chris- 
tianity, Externalism is superficiality ; superficiality is frivol- 
ity ; frivolity means managedbleness by a strong spirit and 
will.' ^ What England has chiefly to dread in the present ad- 
vancing love of ritualism is the scepticism it hides and the 
frivolity it engenders and encourages; each, in its own way, 
fatal to the civil liberty which arises out of religious individu- 
ality and its accompaniment — a claim that the supremacy of 
conscience shall be acknowledged. 

The mediseval follies of Eome will not always be endured ; 
but her esthetic worship, her ritualism, the 'pillows 'she has 
in store for all doubters, the responsibilities she is willing to 
assume, the charm of her ideal unity, her blandishments, and 
pomp, and pride will last ; and when these are separated — 
which they easily may be — from any particular form of des- 
potism ; when the Christian element, in her identical with the 
medicB'dal^ is eliminated for ever ; when the true piety that is 
in her departs ; and when she becomes, as she then will, the 
embodiment of the spirit of the time — her priesthood intellec- 
tual, her splendour unexampled, and mankind everywhere 
drunk with the wine of her fornication ; then, I say, will her 
mysterious influence survive change, and instead of being 
weakened, will rule the world with greater power than ever. 

Of her intolerance, for she icill retain that^ I say nothing ; 
on the predictions which shadow forth her ultimate ruin, I am 
here silent; but I cannot help calling your attention to the 

1 Overbeck on Catholic Orthodoxy. 



REPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 47 

point where scepticism and ritualism meet ; where popery and 
infidelity fraternize, and will one day embrace each other. 
Beware, I entreat yon, of that ending. 

The fault that saps the life 
Is doubt half crushed, half veiled ; the lip assent 
Which finds no echo in the heart of hearts. 

Far better is it to be restless, even to nnhappiness, than to 
be drugged. Far better is it to be an honest unbeliever than 
an hypocritical worshipper ; for how can any worship be other 
than simulated which disregards truth, the only pabulum of 
the soul; which, proceeding on the assumption that God can- 
not be known, finds in forms and ceremonies a place indeed for 
a sensuous fancy, but none for the best aflfections of the soul; 
which substitutes the sentimental for the heartfelt, and whi^h, 
in so doing, turns away man's noblest faculty — the imagina- 
tion, 'the chief connective link between the visible world and 
the invisible — from its appointed task of spiritualising the senses, 
to perform the ignoble drudgery of sensualising the spirit.'^ 

One word more, and I have done. I do not dispute what 
you say as to the utility of the Christian religion, whether 
true or false ; but I most firmly hold that we are not taught in 
Scripture that faith in Olirist is intended to be chiefly utili- 
tarian, or that it is a system revealed for the improvement of 
the present world. The voice of God is, 'Behold, I make all 
things new.' Only as it finally accomplishes the reconstitution 
of humanity in a state of purity and blessedness will the pur- 
pose of God in its introduction be fully and for ever answered. 

Some points to which you have referred I have still left un- 
touched, but I hope before long to be able to resume the 
subject. 

Believe me to be. 

Yours very truly, 



The following chapters may be regarded as having arisen 
out of the foregoing correspondence. 

1 Archdeacon Hare's Mission of the Comforter. 



LIBER LIBRORUM. 



CHAPTER I. 

REVELATION AND INSPIRATION* 

Most of us, in this country at least, profess to "believe 
in a Divine revelation embodied in an inspired book. 
We may therefore perhaps, for our present purpose, be 
allowed to assume not only that the Father of our 
spirits can, if He will, communicate with the creatures 
He has made, but that He actually has done so through 
the agency of man ; and, further, that these communi- 
cations, whatever may be their value Or extent, are 
included in the book we call the Bible. 

The point for consideration is. What is meant by this 
assumption? What do we understand by Revelation, 
and what by Inspiration ? Is the book supposed to be 
inspired infallible in its utterances? If so, does this 
infallibility extend to everything which is therein in- 
cluded? If not, how is the inspired to be distinguished 
from the uninspired, the human from the Divine ? These 
are the questions which, in one form or other, continu- 
ally present themselves for solution, and which the men 
3 



50 LIBEE LTBKORUM. 

of this generation find themselves obliged to examine 
afresh, and, if possible, to settle. 

Such topics cannot, however, be disposed of lightly or 
in few words, for they involve matters which must be 
searched out honestly and without reserve, whether the 
result be sadness or satisfaction. They are not mere 
abstract enquiries. The Bible exists^ and the very fact 
of its existence, to say nothing of its history, renders it 
imperative that its pretensions should be either sustained 
or overthrown. The highest minds that have ever 
appeared upon earth have reverently bowed before its 
teachings, and the humblest have been upheld by its 
consolations. If all alike have been deluded, the delu- 
sion is certainly the most remarkable that has ever 
occurred in the history of our race. 

Further,, the Book must be treated by itself, and apart 
altogether from any deductions that have been drawn 
from its contents ; for nothing can be clearer than that 
Scripture is self-sustained and self-interpreting. 

The Sacred Writings contain ' a record of facts, and 
make an immediate application of the facts, but they do 
no more ; life and not thought is the object to which 
they primarily minister, and so they minister (as no 
other writings ever could do) to thought through life. 
They set forth a truth with simple distinctness, but do 
not say hoio it is, or ichy it is.'^ They are therefore 
absolutely independent of all commentators, and must 
not be mixed up with any inferences, or set of inferences, 
deduced by theologians ; with any series of propositions, 
true or false; Avith any system of doctrine, however 

* Vi^estcott on the Resurrection. 



REVELATION AND INSPIRATION. 51 

apparently conclusive, which may at any time have 
been framed from the record. 

Nor should the Bible be regarded as the only channel 
through which God speaks to man. 

Nature is a revelation. 'The heavens declare the 
glory of God, and the firmament showeth His handy- 
work.' Men are justly blameable who fail to discern 
God, more or less, in His works. 'For the invisible 
things of Him, from the creation of the world are clearly 
seen (being understood by the things that are made), 
even His eternal power and Godhead.' The guilt of 
Paganism, whether ancient or modern, is to be measured 
by the extent to which every individual, in his love of 
idolatry and its abominations, turns a deaf ear to the 
teachings of the natural world regarding the one God. 
The apostle Paul asserts this when he argues that blind- 
ness and perversity shut up the heathen in sin, and 
necessitate a Redeemer ; although he nowhere says, as 
many persons affirm, that, remaining what they are 
during life, they are shut out of the Divine compassion. 
This conclusion, however common, is but a fallible, and 
probably very inaccurate, human inference. 

Family life, again, is a revelation. The ordinance of 
parent and child reveals God as the Father of spirits. 
Our Lord recognizes this when He says, ' If ye, being 
evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, 
how much more shall your heavenly Father give the 
Holy Spirit to them that ask Him.' 

The Bible is pre-eminently such only in so far as it 
makes God known to us ; only in so far as it unveils the 
Divine character, or discloses Divine designs ; only in so 
far as it casts light on what would otherwise be kept 



52 LIBER LIBRORUIVI. 

from us, because unattainable by the human mind apart 
from this method of communication. 

The precise extent of its teaching ; the value of the 
information it imparts; the limits within which the 
Book may be regarded as infallible ; and the process by 
which what is Divine in it may be separated from that 
which is human, will come under our notice in due time. 
That it has a human aspect no one attempts to deny; 
that it reveals chiefly ' through the relations of ordinary 
daily life ;' that it comes to us ' sometimes intermingled 
with the private histories and varying fortunes of an 
Eastern people,' is as certain as that it was given ' at 
sundry times and in divers manners;' but the Book is 
not on these accounts the less a revelation, nor is it, as a 
consequence, in any degree unadapted either to our 
nature or necessities. 

IisrspiRATiois^ is that process by which God, for an 
end^ not only communicates to certain men facts or 
truths, the knowledge of which could not be attained in 
any other way ; but also the ability to teach to others, 
without error or defect, the truths thus revealed. In- 
spiration, therefore, properly so called, implies both 
reception and utterance, the capacity to receive, and the 
power to communicate Divine truth authoritatively and 
infallibly. That which is not infallibly true cannot be a 
revelation from God. That which is not communicated 
to man without any admixture of error cannot, properly 
speaking, be the word of the Heavenly Father. 

By an inspired man, then, we understand one who has 
received, by a direct inbreathing of light and truth from 
God, a message to others ; a commission involving an 
obligation, sometimes to speak, sometimes to write, 



REVELATION AND INSPIRATION. 53 

sometimes, under providential guidance, to record faith- 
fully, although not always without liability to error, a 
fact, or conversation, or discourse; sometimes, under 
like conditions, to narrate a history ; sometimes to com- 
pile and edit existing documents ; sometimes, by direct 
inspiration, to write letters ; and sometimes to predict 
future events. 

In the execution of such tasks, infallibility will doubt- 
less belong to all that has been directly revealed from 
above; to all prediction founded thereupon, and to all 
that is communicated by special command ; but not by 
any means of necessity to everything that has thus 
providentially been preserved from oblivion. 

The person so commissioned may thoroughly compre- 
hend his own words, or he may have the depth of mean- 
ing involved in his utterances concealed from him. He 
may, like Luke, write only because ' many having taken 
in hand to set forth in order a declaration of things 
surely believed,' it 'seemed good,' to him to write also; 
or, like Daniel, he may record words respecting which 
he is obliged to say, ' I heard, but I understood not.' 
He may, like Paul on one occasion, feel that he speaks 
'by permission,' and not by commandment; or, like the 
same apostle at another time, he may claim to express 
himself ' not in the woids which man's wisdom teacheth, 
but which the Holy Ghost teacheth.' He may speak 
with authority, and demand audience as a messenger of 
God ; or he may beseech and entreat, as a fellow-sufierer, 
that his words may be received with a loving heart, 
since love alone moves him to utter them. He may be 
altogether unconscious that he is writing for all time, 
foreseeing the wants of all generations, and supplying 



54 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

the Churcli with spiritual nourishment for two thousand 
years ; or he may have some slight and dim intimation 
that this is the case. 

Let these things, however, be as they may, it is indis- 
putable that, if inspired in this high sense, the man is 
gifted with all that is requisite to enable him to execute 
the Divine commission faithfully ; which he can of course 
only do by receiving from Him who gave it such light 
as may be needful to enlighten others — such supernatu- 
ral guidayice as may be required to preserve him from 
important error. So far as the apostles were concerned, 
this sort of help seems to have been directly promised 
to them by the Saviour, when, speaking of Hhe Com- 
forter ' that was to come, He says, 'He shall guide you 
into all truth. He shall bring all things to your reniein- 
brance whatsoever I have spoken unto you.' 

The way in which this may be accomplished is no 
concern of ours. To what extent such men unite with 
the Divine revealer ; how far they themselves accurately 
understand that which they communicate to others; or 
how far they are merely passive instruments in the 
hands of God, it is impossible for us to know, nor is it 
of any moment that we should have an opinion on the 
subject. What we want to ascertain is, not hoio apos- 
tles or prophets received that which they have recorded, 
but whether that which they say is their own or God's ? 
whether it is merely a human judgment, or a Divine and 
therefore authoritative message ? 

A Book is inspired, just to the extent that it contains 
knowledge which has been supernaturally communicated 
for ends which could not otherwise have been attained. 
If, as in the case of the Bible, the communication has 



REVELATION" AND INSPIRATION. 55 

been made to men who lived ages ago, the book, or 
rather those portions of it which embody the divine 
revelation, is authoritative and unquestionable only to 
the extent that the original text has been preserved and 
faithfully translated. 

If it can be shown that the series of tracts which con- 
stitute the Bible — written, as it is admitted they have 
been, by men living at different and far distant periods 
— ^have, each and all of them, from first to last been thus 
produced and preserved, tlien^ as Mr. Burgon asserts,^ 
' every chapter, every verse, every word, every syllable 
of it ' may be regarded as ' the direct utterance of the 
Most High,' but not otherwise. Dr. Garson, reviewing 
a volume on the evidences by the late Daniel Wilson, 
Bishop of Calcutta, takes this ground and says, 'It 
requires as much inspiration to tell what o'clock it is by- 
inspiration, as to reveal the Gospel itself.' If all Scrip- 
ture, he adds, is given by inspiration, ^ the reference to 
Paul's cloak requires as much inspiration as those pas- 
sages that declare the way of salvation.' 

This, however, is mere folly, since Paul obviously 
neither needed nor enjoyed any help from above, either 
in expressing his wish that the parchments should be 
sent, or in any other matter relating to his personal 
w^ants or wishes. We may be well assured ' the Divine 
Being does not resort to miracle without occasion or be- 
yond occasion!' 

All this may freely be allowed without at all shaking 

^ Inspiration and Interpretation : seven Sermons before the Uni- 
versity of Oxford. By the Rev. J. W. Burgon, M. A., Fellow of 
Oriel College. So, in effect, Gaussen, Haldane, Dr. Candlish, and 
others. 



56 LIBEE LIBKORUM. 

the foundation on which we rest the assertion, that the 
Bible is inspired in a sense exceptional enough to re- 
move it out of the rank of even the highest of merely 
human compositions. For if its teachings be only the 
words of men so purified and morally elevated that 
their instructions are weightier, more Godlike, more 
profitable than those of other men ; if they who speak 
or write have not received that which they tell us is from 
God, as a message to be delivered^ they have not been 
inspired at all, in the only sense which ought to be 
attached to that word when we connect it with Holy 
Scripture. 

It has already been said that we have nothing what- 
ever to do with the mode in which inspired men may be 
supposed to have received the Divine gift. Perhaps we 
liave as little concern with the precise form in which 
they embody the thought that has been given them ; 
whether it be in prose or poetry, in narrative or in 
epistle, in parable or in lengthened discourse. All thut 
we want to be assured of is, that certain teaching may 
reasonably be confided in as Divine, and therefore infal- 
lible — that it is, in short, pure truth, without error or 
alloy. If this assurance cannot be had, it is but folly 
to attach the importance to the Bible we do, or to seek 
guidance of men who lived and died eighteen hundred 
years ago, rather than in the highest spiritual intuitions 
of our own souls. 

The great question then arises, whether the Divine 
autliority claimed in the Bible for prophets and apostles 
should be extended to all that is recorded in Scripture ; 
whether we ought to affirm of ' the Book ' that it is from 
first to last, and in all parts, 'the Word of God;' or 



REVELATION AND INSPIRATION. 57 

whether we should be content with the assertion that it 
contains and embodies that Word. If the former view 
be correct, it is infalUble throughout. If the latter, its 
infallibility must be limited to certain portions. We 
shall find the enquiry both interesting and important. 
Let us not be afraid of it. 

For the present, it is assumed that inspiration, and 
therefore infallibility, does not belong to the entire 
book ; and, further, that a principle may be found by 
the application of which that which is inspired may be 
distinguished from that which is not. 
3* 



CHAPTER II. 

THE EXTENT OF THE CLAIM. 

We have now to enquire what, in relation to its in- 
spiration, the Bible says of itself. Does it, or does it 
not, affirm that everything contained in the volume as 
it stands is inspired, and therefore infallible? 

The first passage that will probably suggest itself in 
this connection to most persons, is found in St. Paul's 
second epistle to Timothy (iii. 16, 17): 'All Scripture 
is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for 
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in 
righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, 
throughly furnished unto all good works.' So the 
words stand in our authorized version, and the text, as 
is well known, is often claimed as positively asserting 
that everything contained, whether in the Old Testa- 
ment or in the New, is inspired of God. 

But does the writer affirm this ? Clearly, not at all ; 
for at the time Paul wrote, no such book as the New 
Testament was in existence. He could therefore only 
refer to the Old. Further, the words of the apostle as 
given in our version are not the words he used. Paul 
does not say that all Scripture (whatever may be in- 
cluded under that designation) is given by inspiration 
or ' God-breathed,' but that all Divinely inspired Scrip- 
ture — all Scripture, that is, from God — is also profit- 



THE EXTENT OF THE CLAIM. 59 

able. (See Alford, EUicott, Adam Clarke, and Pye 
Smith.) 

The apostle had, in the preceding verse, been telling 
his ' son Timothy ' that the Holy Scriptures, with which 
he had been acquainted from his childhood, were able 
to make him wise unto salvation through faith in Christ, 
and he now adds, 'All Scripture given by inspiration of 
God is Y>ro&t2ib\e for the perfectio7i of character,^ To 
suppose that he here means to affirm that the catalogue 
of the Dukes of Edom, given us in the first book of 
Chronicles, are to be placed side by side with the pro- 
phecies of Isaiah or the utterances of the Psalms, that 
both are ' God-breathed ' and alike given ' that the man 
of God maybe perfect,' surely savours far more of super- 
stition than of piety. 

Nor is this all. For the supposition that the apostle 
intended to say that all Scripture (meaning thereby all 
that was then embodied in the Septuagint,/*r(9m which 
he hahitually quotes) was given by inspiration of God, 
is to make him assert the inspiration of the Apocrypha, 
for there is every reason to suppose that some at least 
of the books now known as apocryphal were, even in 
his day, included in the Old Testament Scriptures.^ It 

^ The books thus found in the Septuagint version were not, 
indeed, in the Hebrew text, nor in the canon acknowledged bj the 
Jews of Palestine ; but ' they were recognised by the Hellenistic 
Jews, and, therefore, by the men with whom Paul came more im- 
mediately into contact.' In Clement of Alexandria, in Origen and 
Athanasius, we find citations from the books of the present Apo- 
crypha as 'Scripture,' 'Divine Scripture,' and 'Prophecy.' Augus- 
tine admitted several apocryphal books. It was reserved for ther 
age of the Reformation to stamp the word ' apocrypha ' with its 



60 I.IBER LIBROEUM. 

is generally supposed that these books obtained a place 
in the Greek Scriptures about one hundred and thirty- 
years before Christ. ' The only copies of the Scriptures 
in existence for the first three hundred years after Christ, 
either among the Jews or Christians of Greece, Italy, 
or Africa, contained these books without any mark of 
distinction that we know of. Origen, at great length, 
vindicates these parts of the Greek version, asserting 
that they were true and genuine, and made use of in 
Greek among all the churches of the Gentiles, and that 
we should not attend to the fraudulent comments of the 
Jews, but take that only for true, in the Holy Scrip- 
tures, which the seventy had translated, for that this 
only was confirmed by apostolic authority.'^ The ab- 
sence of any list of inspired books in the writings of the 
apostle, and the fact that he commonly quotes from the 
Greek Septuagint without remark, certainly favours the 
opinion that St. Paul did not intend to say that every 
imHting then regarded as Scripture was inspired. 

Other statements made by Paul, by his brother apos- 
tles, and by Christ Himself, confirm us in the propriety 
• 

present signification. (Rev. B. H. Plumptre, in Smith's Dictionary, 
art. 'Apocrypha.') 

' The absokite infalhbility of the sacred books throughout was set 
up by Protestantism as a counterpoise to the infalUble authority 
asserted and claimed by the Romish Church. Protestantism sought 
to recover, hy means of the outwardly authoritative and entire infalli- 
hility of hooks, what it had lost by rejecting inspired councils and 
popish infallibility.' (Tholuck, quoted in Davidson's Introduction, 
p. 372.) 

^ Kitto's Bib. Cycl. by Dr. Alexander ; art. ' Apocrypha,' by Dr. 
Wright. 



THE EXTENT OF THE CLAIM. 61 

of limiting infallibility to portions of the Bible. The 
following may be quoted : ' Prophecy came not in old 
time by the will of man ; but holy men of God spake as 
they were moved by the Holy Ghost' (2 Peter i. 21). 
' God who in sundry times and divers manners spake in 
time past unto the fathers hy the prophets'' (Heb. i. 1). 
Paul speaks of the fiiith of the Ephesians as ' built on 
the foundation of the apostles and prophets ' (Eph. ii. 20). 
It may not, indeed, be argued from these passages that 
inspiration is to be confined to the writings of the 
prophets; but it is surely worth notice, that in Scrip- 
ture prophecy is specially ^narked out as given by 
inspiration. Attach to the word ' prophecy ' the mean- 
ing it always has in the Bible, viz., not that of predic- 
tion merely, but all Divine utterances, and it is found to 
be only another phrase for ' the oracles of God ' (Ro- 
mans iii. 2) ; for the 'lively oracles' (Acts vii. 38) ; for 
the holy writings {ypacpaiq dyiatq) (Romans i. 2) ; for the 
sacred letters (ra^lepa ypdiLimTo) (2 Tim. iii. 15) ; and for 
* every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God ' 
(Matt. iv. 4). 

That Holy Scripture is not unfrequently limited by 
Christ Himself seems clear. He sometimes speaks of it 
as if it were coniined to 'Moses and the prophets' 
(Luke xvi. 29-31) — that is, to the revealed law of God 
whether given by Moses or by later inspired teachers. 
After the resurrection, we find Him expounding as 
Divine ' all things written in the laio of Moses^ and m 
the prophets^ and in the Psalms concerning Himself* 
(Luke xxiv. 44) ; but in no part of the Lord's teaching 
can there be found a word to justify the assertion that 
everything contained in the Old Testament from 



62 LIBER LIBEOEUM. 

Genesis to Malachi ought to be regarded as equally 
authoritative and infallible. 

It has, indeed, been maintained that in the words 
just quoted Christ refers to the three great divisions 
under which, it is supposed, the Old Testament writings 
were then classed. But there is no evidence whatever 
of this. To speak of the law of Moses, of the pro- 
phets, and of the Psalms, as containing predictions 
regarding Himself, is surely a very diiferent thing from 
asserting that the law, the prophecies, and the remain- 
der of the books are integral sections of a completed 
whole. As reasonable would it be to affirm that Paul 
taught this triple division of a complete volume, when 
he tells us that he persuaded the Jews ' concerning Jesus, 
both out of the law of Moses and out of the prophets.' 
The triple division is indeed ' very ancient ; but it is 
difficult to say what were included under each of these 
heads. There was no fixed and unalterable arrange- 
ment of the sacred books as that which is commonly 
assumed anterior to the fifth century of the Christian 
era.'^ To rest a claim for the inspiration of the 
entire volume on such a basis as this, is weakness 
indeed. Equally unwise is it to conclude, without any 
good reason for so doing, that every book must be 
inspired from which Christ or His apostles quoted, 
especially when it is remembered that non-quotation 
from any book of Scripture is never regarded as fatal 
to its authority, and while other books referred to, like 
that of ' Enoch,' are now unknown. Such passages as 
* Thou hast magnified Thy word above all Thy name ' 
evidently do not refer to the Bible as a book. 

* Kitto's Bib. Cycl., art. 'Canon, 'by Dr. Alexander. 



THE EXTENT OF THE CLAIM. 63 

Specific assertions of inspiration are indeed not un- 
frequently put forth ; hut none of these apply to the 
whole volume. The following may be cited : — - 

1. There is a claim on behalf of the Divine character 
of the Mosaic tabernacle services, in the words, ' The 
Holy Ghost this signifying '^ (Heb. ix. 8). Also a very 
distinct one on behalf of the direct communicatio7is made 
to Moses by God: 'Have ye not read that which was 
spoken unto you by God'' (Matt. xxii. 31 referring to 
Exod. iii. 6). 

2. For the inspiration of the prophets who spake 
beforehand of Christ : ' Searching what or what manner 
of time the Spirit of Christ luhich was in them did sig- 
nify ' (1 Pet. i. II). And again: ' Prophecy came not 
in old time by the will of man : but holy men of God 
spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost ' (2 Pet. 
i. 21). And again: 'Those things which God before 
had showed by the mouth of all His prophets' (Acts 
iii. 18). 

3. For David : ' Which the Holy Ghost by the mouth 
o/ JDa^;^(7 spake ' (Acts i. 16; iv. 25). For Isaiah: 
' Well sp)aJce the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet ' 
(Acts xxviii. 25). For Jeremiah : ' Whereof the Holy 
Ghost said'' (Heb. x. 15). 

4. Under given circumstances for the apostles gene- 
rally : 'It is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost'' 
(Mark xiii. 11.) Paul makes it for himself, when he 
commends the Thessalonians for receiving his teaching 
not as his, but 'as it is in truth the Word of God^ 
(1 Thess. ii. 13). Elsewhere he says, 'We speak not 
in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which 
the Holy Ghost teacheth' (1 Cor. ii. 13). John, in the 



64 LLBER LIBROKUM. 

Apocalypse, distinctly affirms that what he reveals was 
' sent and signified ' to him by Christ (Rev. i. 1). 

It is not of course pretended that only those writers 
are inspired for whom this special claim is made ; but 
it is surely singular that while inspiration is affirmed 
generally of prophets and apostles, and specially of 
some, it is nowhere claimed either generally or spe- 
cially for historians, or for the entire volume of Scrip- 
ture. Everything, indeed, indicates that the claim of 
inspiration, and therefore of infallibility, is limited to 
those portions of the Bible which are revelations from 
heaven, or essential to their comprehension. 

Under the hea(i, then, of inspired Scripture may be 
classed all that we are told of God beyond what may be 
gathered from His Works and Providential government 
of the world; all the information we have as to our future 
destiny ; every prophetic intimation ; every elevating 
and purifying truth which man could not otherwise 
reach. From it may be excluded without irreverence 
the merely historical, however true and useful^ gene- 
alogies however important in their place; poems or 
proverbs however wise, which are but expressions of 
human experience ; references to physical phenomena 
ordinarily expressed in colloquial language ; and all 
acts or utterances which are not in accordance with the 
spirit and temper of the Lord Jesus. There are such in 
the Old Testament; and as these, however needful to a 
true delineation of men and times, are not in themselves 
intended for our imitation, and have no tendency ' to 
make the man of God perfect,' it is not presumptuous 
to say that, whatever may be their value, they are but 
records of human infirmity. Nor is it any answer to 



THE EXTENT OF THE CLAIM. ()5 

reply that from all these portions a devout mind can 
gain instruction, for by such a mind ' sermons ' may be 
found ' in stones ;' but this does not make the stones 
inspired. 

The distinction is not a novel one ; it has been urged 
by some of the ablest and best divines the Church has 
produced.^ 

We have said that inspiration, whether verbal or 
otherwise, implies the power of communicating the 
message received from God without error or mistake ; 
it may also be understood to include the ahillty to nar- 
rate exactly as they happened all occurrences and con- 
versations 171 which absolute accuracy was requisite^ and 
to select, without failure of judgment, such written 
memorials as it seemed good to Divine Providence to 
perpetuate for the use of the Church. But it by no 
means follows that two inspired men must therefore 
necessarily narrate events in the same words, or pre- 
cisely in the same order ; nor does such aid either in- 
volve the Divine sanction of every act thus recorded, 
or give a character of Divine truthfulness to every his- 
tory and genealogy that may be inserted. Further, 
where communications such as those embodied in the 
Bible, have been recorded by men who lived ages ago, 
we must have some evidence that the books containing 
them have been carefully preserved. This we certainly 
have. 

The preservation of the Old Testament by the Jew 
— considering what it contains — through thousands 
of years, obviously implies a Providential care of it, 

^ See Appendix, Note A. * Eminent -Witnesses.' 



66 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

scarcely less Divine than that which originally attended 
its formation. Accuracy in translation being within 
the reach of human industry, has, for that reason, been 
left to be secured by the unaided energies of man. 

And this leads us to the consideration oi certain facts 
relating to the Bible, which plainly come under our 
cognizance, and which certainly make against the sup- 
position that everything in the book is Divinely in- 
spired, and therefore infallible, since they show that 
the Bible has not been preserved from the accidents 
which are inseparable from the transmission of ancient 
documents through the ages. On the contrary, it is 
certain that while, as a whole, the book has been 
remarkably cared for, it contains, in matters compara- 
tively unimportant, not a few errors and some positive 
contradictions. These can only be accounted for on one 
of two suppositions: either that the writers were not 
in these particulars Divinely inspired and so preserved 
from the possibility of error, or that the Book itself has, 
at a later period, been exposed sometimes to wilful in- 
terpolation, and sometimes to clerkly inaccuracy. 

We take no notice here of alleged contradictions 
between prophecies and their fulfilment, or of apparent 
discrepancies in doctrine ; for these, whether real or 
unreal — and we think them, for the most part, unreal — 
would lead us on to debateable ground. We wish 
simply to deal with facts which no one can dispute ; 
and therefore only bring forward inaccuracies that are 
obvious at a glance. The following instances will suffice 
to show what is meant. 

' In the twenty-second chapter of the second book of 
Chronicles "forty-two years" ought to be twenty -two. 



THE EXTENT OF THE CLAIM. 67 

This is evident wlien tlie passage is compared witli tlie 
second book of Kings (viii. 26). Again, in the second 
book of Samuel (viii. 4), David is said to have taken 
from Hadadezer *' seven hundred horsemen." In the 
first of Chronicles (xviii. 4) the number is said to have 
been '' seven thousand horsemen." In the book of 
Numbers, " those that died in the plague " (on account 
of Baal Peor) are said to have been "twenty and four 
thousand," while in the first of Corinthians (x. 8) it is 
said, in relation to the same event, there fell in one day 
three and twenty thousand.' 

With regard to the numbering of the people mistakes 
are numerous. E. g. : According to Samuel (2 Sam. 
xxiv. 9), Joab's report to David after the census is 
^ eight hundred thousand' fighting men of Israel, and 
*^f]ve hundred thousand' of Jndah. In the first of 
Chronicles (xxi. 5) the same report is said to have been 
'eleven hundred thousand' of Israel, and ^four hundred 
and seventy thousand' of Judah. In the first of Kings 
(xv. 5) we are told that David (as monarch) never 
deviated from the right ' save in the matter of Uriah the 
Hittite,' yet we know that he sinned in numbering the 
people, and was punished for it. Further, in relation to 
this very punishment, it is said in the second of Samuel 
(xxiv. 13) that the prophet Gad came to David and 
said to him, ^ Shall seven years of famine come unto 
thee in thy land?' while in the first of Chronicles (xxi. 
11-12) we read, ' Thus saith the Lord, Choose thee either 
three years of famine.' To keep to the same event — in 
the second of Samuel (xxiv. 24) David, we are told, 
paid for the threshing floor over which the plague 
stopped 'fifty shekels of silver.' In the first of Chron- 



68 LEBER LIBRORUM. 

icles (xxi. 25) the price paid is said to have been 'six 
himch'ed shekeh of (/old, '^ 

That some of these apparent contradictions may be 
explained by the mistakes of transcribers as to letters 
used to express numeral powers, or by the accidental 
addition or omission of a cipher, is probable enough ; 
but let that be as it may, it is as certain that they exist, 
as it is that they relate only to matters of detail, and 
have no bearing whatever on moral or religious truth. 
To deny these discrepancies, or to explain them away in 
an unsatisfactory manner, is only to confirm unbelievers 
in their incredulity. To shut one's eyes to them is 
mere stupiaity. It is to say in effect that if we refuse 
to see a fact we shall not come into collision with it, 
which is simply as untrue as it is absurd. As the Bishop 
of London has well remarked : ^ When laborious inge- 
nuity has exerted itself to collect a whole store of such 
difficulties, supposing them to be real, what on earth 
does it signify ? They may quietly float away without 
our being able to solve them, if we bear in mind the 
acknowledged fact that there is a human element in 
the Bible.' 

They are, however, certainly fatal to those who assert 
that ' not only is the Word of God in the Bible, but the 
Bible is itself, in the strictest and fullest sense, in every 
particular of its contents, and in every expression which 
it uses, the infallible word of the one living and true 
God.' Just as, in like manner, the voice of the rocks 
must eventually cover with confusion all who are unwise 
enough to saytbat 'the Bible could not reveal spiritual 
truth infallibly, unless it were infallible also in all that 
it says about physical truth; in other words, that all its 



THE EXTENT OF THE CLAIM. 69 

references to physical truths must be true, God being, 
if without offence it may be thus spoken, responsible 
for them.' This ground is taken by Mr. Burgon, Dr. 
Candlish, and others. 

But the fact is, Scripture nowhere puts forward any 
such claim. If it did it would be a thing of ' the letter ' 
• rather than of ' the spirit,' and the least flaw in expres- 
sion would be fatal to its pretensions. Again, if inspira- 
tion were in the letter, it is not easy to see how the book 
could be translated without being destroyed : whereas, 
as a fact, it passes into every tongue, and is, when faith- 
fully rendered, quite as much the Word of God in one 
language as in another. Further, the apostles not un- 
frequently quote the sense of a passage rather than its 
exact words ; in this, as in other ways, leaving the im- 
pression that the infallible Word of God is to be found 
only in that body of doctrine, whether prophetic or 
preceptive, which they had received from above ; con- 
nected^ indeed^ but not to be confounded, with the his- 
tory of their nation, the character of their literature, or 
the experience of their lives. 

On the other hand, to concede the fact that the sacred 
writers were only inspired to teach Divine truths and 
that in other matters they are left to their natural facul- 
ties as honest witnesses, far from weakening the cause 
of Scripture, goes directly to deprive the objector of 
his most dangerous weapon. 'The spiritual element in 
Scripture — that is, everything in it which concerns our 
relation to God and to eternity — tnongh combined with 
other elements, is plainly distinguishable from them^ 
and wholly independent of them ; and since the evi- 
dence of Christianity attaches infallibility only to the 



70 LIBER LIBEORTJM. 

spiritual element, the discovery of errors in the Bible 
does not toiicli Christianity at all.' ^ 

That the structure of the. Bible, the marvellous unity 
which subsists between all its parts — the reverberation, 
so to speak, of one great truth through all its pages, 
from Genesis to the Apocalypse— affords strong ground 
for believing that its production, as a lohole^ is, in a cer- 
tain sense, the work of the Divine mind, providentially 
guiding each writer, compiler, or editor, to one great 
end, we are far from disputing ; but this fact, while it 
most clearly and distinctly separates the Book from all 
mere human compositions, and while it should guard us 
against the folly implied in asserting that this or that 
is superfluous, by no means proves that everything it 
contains is divinely inspired, and therefore infallibly 
true, or that in all its parts it is ' profitable for doctrine, 
for reproof, for correction, or for instruction in right- 
eousness.' The treasure is in earthen vessels in more 
senses than one, and this simply because it is on the 
whole best that it should be so. 

Yet it should not be forgotten that while, as a rule, 
truth revealed by God to man is to be found in the spirit 
rather than in the letter, for Divine thoughts are always 
^ Spirit and Life,' the literal cannot always be dispensed 
with. The prophecies which declare at once the great- 
ness and the lowliness of Messiah were evidently 
intended to be understood literally, so many of them 
having been literally i\A?i\{Q(\. A prophecy, indeed, can 
scarcely be said to be fulfilled at all which is not, to 
some extent at least, fulfilled to the letter. If God did 
not literally ' bring a flood of waters upon the earth to 

1 Byrne's Donnellan Lectures before the University of Dublin. 



THE EXTENT OF THE CLAIM. 71 

destroy all flesh wherein is the breath of life from under 
heaven,' the announcement that He would do so is 
untrustworthy. But if He did, it is comparatively of 
little consequence hoxo the event was brought about, or 
whether the waters did or did not cover the whole 
earth. 

Why, then, should we be so anxious regarding the 
literal accuracy, for instance, of everything in the Pen- 
tateuch ? Why should we be troubled if we find it 
impossible to reconcile the two accounts of the creation 
given in the first and second chapters of Genesis, and 
therefore come to the conclusion that it is needless to 
enquire whether they record the same event, or whether, 
as some suppose^ the former relates to a race that passed 
away long before Adam was born ? Why should we be 
at all careful to decide whether the ' six days ' spoken 
of mean six of our days, or whether they represent 
periods of long or short duration ? whether the narra- 
tive of the Fall is to be understood literally, or whether 
it in any degree involves allegory or other figure of 
speech ? Why should we be concerned to know 
whether by the term ' Sons of God ' in the sixth chapter, 
the pious descendants of Seth are meant, or whether, 
as the late Dr. Maitland has maintained in his 'Eruvin,' 
other intelligences, with whom Ave have now no possi- 
bility of contact, are intended ? Why should we even 
stop to enquire within what limits the entrance of 
animals into the Ark is to be confined, or yet whether 
the Flood itself overflowed the whole globe, or only 
those portions of it which were then inhabited ? 

These questions are not unimportant. They all have 
their place in Biblical criticism, and they have all been 



72 LIBER LIBROETJM. 

treated, if not invariably with wisdom, certainly with 
abundant learning. But, settle them as we may, the 
value of the document out of which they spring is 
undiminished. So far as any man's trust in the Bible 
is concerned, it matters very little whether this or that 
portion of the narrative is to be understood literally or 
figuratively. The one sole question in which he is 
interested is this. Can the record be depended upon ? 
is it essentially truthful ? 

Literality is certainly not in itself essential to truth- 
fulness. The parables of the Lord are quite as true as 
any other parts of His teaching ; and figures of speech 
may sometimes express truth in all its fulness and com- 
pleteness, better than any simple and literal statements 
could do. The book of Genesis was not written for 
Englishmen only, nor yet for the men of the nineteenth 
century alone. It has no exclusive message to the prac- 
tical, the scientific, the learned. It is addressed to men 
of all ages, of all temperaments, in all the various stages 
of civilization and of culture, and the problem to be 
solved in producing a written account of the origin of 
the world was this : How can the information be best 
communicated so as to be equally adapted to the con- 
dition and necessities of each and all ? It may be that 
this could be effected only by divergence from the literal, 
by the occasional use of a form of speech more likely to 
convey a true impression than any plain, prosaic, matter 
of fact statement could possibly do. Be this, however, as 
it may, the value of the Bible is by no means dependent 
on these things ; and one scarcely knows which most to 
wonder at — the malice which rejoices to declare that 
the authority of Scripture is overthrown if a discrepancy 



THE EXTENT Oi^' THE CLAIM. 73 

can be discovered, or the folly of those Christians who 
seem to stake Divine revelation itself on the verbal 
accuracy of either text or translation. 

We ask not, then, whether the ' bow ' in heaven Urst 
became visible after the Flood, or whether, as previously 
existing, it was only appropriated as the token of the 
covenant made with the earth ; whether literally men 
thought to build a tower that should reach unto heaven, 
or whether the ' city and tower ' spoken of ought not 
to be regarded as a symbolic expression of the fact that 
a great ungodly centralisation was now attempted ; 
whether the confusion of tongues, although in the first 
instance judicial and special, was, as to its perpetuation, 
anything, more or different from that tendency — per- 
petually manifested where no common centre exists, and 
where communication is infrequent — to vary and corrupt 
a language until it becomes absolutely unintelligible to 
those who once in common terms expressed their wants 
and wishes. 

None of these questions need we care to have an- 
swered, simply because, as we have before said, the 
truthfulness of the narrative does not depend on its 
literality. Expound these matters as we may, the record 
still stands, the only record that can be regarded as 
furnishing even a plausible account of the world's history 
prior to the calling of Abram. And this is equally true 
in relation to the entire Pentateuch. What does it 
matter whether Moses was directly inspired to write 
all that is found therein, or whether he was divinely 
commissioned to condense and to correct fragments of 
earlier documents, and to give shape to the memory of 
traditions otherwise sure to pass away ? What does it 



74 LIBER LIBROEUM. 

matter whether these writings were or were not at a 
later period re-edited with additions? Of one thing we 
may be quite sure, viz. that Moses did not write the 
account of his own death. 

What if many of the numbers given in Exodus 
should, as Bishop Colenso asserts, be inaccurate ? What 
is to be gained by assertions or denials relative to 
matters which have for ever passed out of the reach of 
our verification ? What if, here and there, a law should 
seem to us strange and unaccountable ; an event difficult 
to comprehend; a statement to involve an apparent 
contradiction ? What has all this to do with the essential 
value of the Book ? Absolutely nothing ; unless thereby 
its truthfulness can be set aside. 

If, indeed, Moses never existed, being only a myth ; 
if no deluge ever took place ; if the children of Israel 
were not led out of Egypt by the special interference of 
God ; if the supernatural element can be altogether 
discharged, either as fraudulent imposture or mere 
delusion: why then certainly the sooner this strange 
book is buried the better. ' If,' as has been observed 
by an able writer in Eraser's Magazine, ' the rules of 
criticism require us to set aside, as fabulous or legendary, 
the miraculous events related in the Bible, then the only 
witnesses from whom we learn anything regarding God 
as revealed to man are so entirely discredited that we 
cannot trust anything they say. The Apostles' Creed' 
ought in this case to be reduced to the words, " I believe 
that Jesus Christ was crucified under Pontius Pilate." 
The rest of the history would become the domain of the 
historical imagination.' 

We now proceed to enquire whether any principle 



THE EXTENT OF THE CLAIM. 75 

can be found by the application of which the inspired 
in Scripture can be separated from the uninspired ; and 
further, whether intelligent and ordinarily educated 
Christians do or do not possess any faculty by the use 
of which they can exercise the discrimination needed. 



CHAPTER III. 



THE VERIFYING EACFLTY. 



We now approach that portion of our task which 
demands of us a principle^ by the help of which we 
may, without weakening faith in Scripture as a whole, 
separate its parts, and distinguish between that which 
is Divine and that which is human. 

Such a principle will assuredly not be sought for in 
vain, if it is recollected that all inspired Scripture is con- 
gruous ; not only in the sense of being in itself suitable 
and pertinent to the purpose for which it was given, but 
also as being in harmony with all that is revealed of the 
character of God. Further — and for this statement we 
have inspired authority — that the congruity thus exist- 
ing is capable of being discerned by every spiritual man 
who is faithful to the light bestowed upon him. 

If this be granted — and it is difficult to see how the 
admission can be refused — we have at once a test by 
which everything assumed to be inspired of God may 
be tried without presumption, and with little probability 
of mistake. 

Before attempting to apply any such test, however, it 
may be necessary to show that God intended that His 
children should thus discriminate; that He has given 
them all that is needful for the accomplishment of the 



THE VERIFYING FACULTY. 77 

work ; and, further, that with regard to Scripture, He 
has made the fulfilment of this duty no unimportant 
part of their moral probation. 

If, therefore, it be said, as it probably will, that any 
attempt to draw a distinction between different parts of 
the Bible — to separate the inspired from the uninspired, 
the Divine from the human — renders the Book as a whole 
useless to simple Christians, inasmuch as they can per- 
ceive no such differences, it is enough to reply that this 
is not the fact^ since that which was true of the oral^ is 
equally true of the written revelation. 

The exhortation of the Apostle John to his converts, 
'Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits 
whether J^hey be of God,' supposes an ability in every 
spiritually enlightened man, whether hearer or reader, 
to discern between that which is of God and that which 
is not. ' Ye have an unction from the Holy One,' says 
the aged saint, and in the power of this unction, * ye 
(the poorest of the flock) know all things.' I myself, 
he says — and if he, other inspired men also — 'have 
not written unto you because ye know not the truth, 
but because ye know it. The anointing which ye have 
received of Him abideth in you, and ye need not that 
any man teach you' (1 John ii. 20 and 27). 

We call this ' the verifying faculty,' and regard it as 
being neither more nor less than reason enlightened and 
sanctified by the Holy Spirit, To vilify reason, as so 
many good but ill-instructed Christians do, is a folly 
which would be unpardonable, if it did not commonly 
arise from sheer ignorance or weakness of mind. As 
Butler truly says, ' Reason is the only faculty we have 
wherewith to judge concerning anything, even re vela- 



78 LIBER LIBKORTJM. 

tion itself.' Its duty in relation to Scripture is to judge, 
' not whether it contains things different from what we 
should have expected from a wise, just, and good Being, 
but whether it contains things plainly contradictory to 
wisdom, justice, or goodness' — in other words, to what 
elsewhere God teaches us of Himself. 

Of course all this goes on the assumption that Divine 
teaching is addressed to men who have at least some 
moral sympathy with its utterances ; that the words of 
God are spiritual words ; that the sheep know the voice 
of the Good Shepherd. In a limited sense, much of this 
is true of every book the tendency of which is elevating. 
All moral teaching worthy of the name addresses itself 
to the consciousness of those to whom it speaks. Only 
as it comes in contact with a prepared mind ; only as it 
proves an interpreter of floating and half-formed thought, 
or is the expression of feelings before but j)artially re- 
cognised or understood, does any book of this kind pro- 
duce permanent impressions, or prove of much real 
value. 

But this is true of the Bible in an altogether pre- 
eminent degree ; for this book, whether it reveals new 
truth, or whether it explains a man to himself, is, like 
the sun in heaven, seen in its own light. Not that all 
truth is in this way made plain to all persons ; but that 
everything essential to the growth in goodness of the 
man who reads, is, by a mysterious affinity, recognised 
and laid hold of for the soul's salvation from evil. The 
softened heart responds to words which awake no echo 
in other breasts. It is always so. The words of Him 
who spake 'as never man spake,' only elicited scorn 
from the great mass of those who heard them uttered. 



THE YERIFYma FACULTY. 79 

The seed and the soil must be adapted to each other, 
or there can be no living product. The spiritual faculty 
may be dormant, the 'God-consciousness' all but dead, 
being completely overridden by ' self-consciousness,' yet 
the possession of it is always recognised. 

It is, indeed, not a little singular that the very Book 
' that has had greater influence upon the world than all 
others,' differs from all others in affirming the darkness 
of the natural man — that man is spiritually dead, and 
in making that statement the basis of all that it contains 
respecting the past and present and future of mankind. 
Still more singular is it, that almost all men feel the 
truth of the statement, and bow before its declaration 
that this is not their true li^. There is a sense, there- 
fore, in which almost all thoughtful men feel the worth 
of the Bible; some of those not least who have most felt 
themselves compelled to oppose it. For what book has 
sounded so the depths of experience, or scaled like it 
the highest pinnacles of thought? What man has not 
learnt through it better to know himself?^ 

The Old Testament is professedly the history of ' a 
peculiar people.' Its prophecies and its revelations 
were all but confined to them. The discourses of 
Jesus, without any exclusion of the many, were, for 
the most part, addressed to the few. The Epistles 
were all written to persons acknowledging the Divine 
authority of the writers. Why, then, should it be 
thought strange to hold that the same utterances, which 
were originally addressed only to those who were more 
or less capable of estimating their value, should still be 
in harmony wdth the spiritual intuitions of those only 
* Man and his Dwelling-place : an Essay. 



80 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

who are prepared to receive them with docility? ' Unto 
him that hath shall be given.' The knowledge of God 
is not imparted to men as if it were evidence addressed 
to the senses, nor can it be conveyed by any merely 
logical process similar to the demonstrations of science. 
No moral truth can be understood until it is appre- 
ciated, and to be appreciated it must be practised. 

That there is a Divine teacher of man's spirit, an^ 
that it is possible for a man's spirit to have converse 
with that teacher, is a truth which would remain true if 
the Bible and all its revelations were to be annihilated ; 
but the recognition of this truth would still be of no 
practical use to any man who was unwilling to listen 
and obey. It matters not whether we call the special* 
faculty by which man attains to a knowledge of the 
Divine, a spiritual gift or a verifying power ; the fact 
is the same ; without it all is dark alike in the Bible 
and in the highest intuitions of the soul. Tenets may 
be drawn from Scripture by any man, but living truths 
only by prepared hearts. It is the forgetfulness or the 
denial of this fact which renders so much that has been 
written on ' the verifying faculty ' in man unsatisfactory ; 
since, according to the moral state of each individual, 
does the application of the phrase in question embody a 
great truth, or involve a pernicious error. 

'The conditions which are required for arriving at 
the kn'owledge of Divine truth are surely stern con- 
ditions ! It is a straight and narrow way which leadeth 
to life! There must be a continual waiting for light; 
a distrust of our own assumptions; a readiness to be 
detected in error, certain that God's meaning is in- 
finitely larger than ours, and that other men may 



THE VERIFYING FACULTY. 81 

perceive an aspect of it which we do not perceive ; a 
belief that He is fulfilling His promise that all shall be 
taught of Hhn in ways which we cannot imagine; a 
dread of shutting out any truth by our impatient notion 
that it must contradict some other ; a determination to 
maintain what little has been given us in the hope of 
its expansion, and never to contradict, if we understand 
ever so little, what may have been given to another ; a 
resolution to hold the ground on which we stand, with- 
out judging him if he cannot yet see what this ground 
is. Hard is it to form these habits of mind. . . I can- 
not help perceiving that this mind, the mind of the little 
child, the mind which our Lord demands of us, has been 
exhibited by many scientific men who have been cen- 
sured and scorned by the religious world of their day, 
and has been sadly deficient in their accusers.'^ 

Without spiritual insight^ nothing is discerned which 
takes hold of the spirit or influences the character. 
Until this is received, truth itself is but an opinion to 
the man who comes in contact with it. It does not 
vitalise because it is not itself vital. It is only a hunaan 
judgment, and, whether true or false, has little if any 
moral power in it. It is dead, being alone. Not until 
opinion is transfigured — not until it quickens into life 
— does it become a truth, and grow, and bring forth 
frftit. 

But another consequence follows. Looked at in this 
way it is of no moment that either the uninstructed or 
the instructed man should be able to say regarding each 
separate passage of Scripture, this is inspired, that is 

^ The Claims of the Bible aud of Science. By the Kev. F. D. 
Maurice. 

4* 



82 LIBER LIBEOKDTVr. 

not. How can he indeed? The revelation itself is not 
a thing apart from daily life, but through its various 
relations ; how, then, can any man undertake to separate 
in each particular the supernatural element from the 
natural which it irradiates and explains? To regard 
anything of the kind as necessary either to confidence or 
to edification is absurd; as absurd, in fact, as it is to 
maintain that ' v/e require an exercise of judgment upon 
the written document before we can allow men to trust 
in their King and Saviour.' Everyone knows that this 
is not the fact; that in all time the multitude never 
have, nor ever can enter upon any such enquiries ; that 
the masses must either believe in Christ directly as an 
actual person related to them, and recognised by them 
in their inmost souls, or they will not believe at all. 
They listen to the announcement that Christ is their 
Redeemer, and they believe the good iiQw^jiist in so far 
as it finds a response in their own spiritual necessities 
and consciousness. Into evidence about documents they 
cannot enter. 

And why should they ? The analytical chemist, when 
called upon to do so, separates the constituent parts of 
the very atmosphere he breathes ; but for all the practi- 
cal purposes of life he well knows that such a process is 
altogether needless. Forgetful of his science, he rejoices 
in the free air of heaven just as the peasant does, and 
thanks God for its vitality. So is it with Scripture. 
The critic may doubt or may be satisfied as to the pre- 
cise place which such or such a passage ought or ought 
not to occupy in relation to other portions of Holy Writ, 
and there are times and seasons when such considera- 
tions are both proper and profitable. But he can scarcely 



THE VERIFYING FACULTY. 83 

be regarded as a wise man who, coming to the Bible for 
strength or consolation, for instruction in righteousness, 
or for help in the perfecting of his character, does any- 
thing else than open his heart to its divine teachings, 
and rejoice Hke a little child in the sunshine it can shed 
around his path. 

If error were in the Bible cunningly interspersed with 
truth, the case would be different. But it is not so. 
The Book, as a whole and as it stands, is wholesome and 
useful ; each portion of it has its proper place, and is 
adequate to fulfil its appointed end. Everything has 
its purpose to fulfil and its object to accomplish, whether, 
properly speaking, inspired or not. Nothing may be 
despised, nothing pronounced superfluous. But every- 
thing in the Book does not take hold alike on the heart 
and conscience. It may be very interesting, as indeed 
it is, to trace on the map the various journeyings of St. 
Paul, or the wanderings of the Children of Israel in the 
wilderness ; to note a hundred undesigned coincidences ; 
to study, and try to reconcile two apparently conflicting 
genealogies ; to examine into and to discuss the chrono- 
logy, the geography, or the natural history of Palestine ; 
all this and much more may be done — and it is fitting 
that in its time and place it should be done — yet it may 
be accomplished without the slightest moral or spiritual 
benefit arising to the man who is thus occupied. 

Real benefit can, in such cases, only be derived from 
connecting the information thus acquired with living 
truth found elsewhere ; by gathering from such research 
indirect evidence in favor of the Book itself, or pleasing 
illustrations to be used in its exposition. But this is a 
very different state of mind from that which is produced 



84 LIBER LIBEOEUM. 

by a devout study of Moses and the prophets; of the 
Psalms ; of Isaiah ; of the Sermon on the Mount ; of the 
discourses and prayers of our Lord with His apostles ; 
of the scenes of the Crucifixion ; of the early history of 
the Church as given in the Acts or in the Epistles ; or 
of the wondrous visions of the Apocalypse. Criticism, 
to the uncritical mind, seems in such cases to be an 
impertinence. The heart opens to the impression such 
passages produce, as the flower opens to the sun or the 
earth drinks in the rain of heaven. 

Facts, whether past or present, correspond to this 
view of things. 

We have already seen that the first Christians were 
under the very same obligation to distinguish the voice 
of God from the voice of man that we are ; and since 
they were enabled to do so only by an endowment com- 
mon to Christians of all time, and known as ' the witness 
of the spiiit,' they were practically in the same position 
as ourselves. Even the most orthodox divines are con- 
strained to admit that the Scriptures can only be received 
on certain conditions, viz., that we are 'satisfied that the 
books themselves contain nothing obviously incompati- 
hie with the ascription to their authors of the Divine 
assistance, but on the contrary are in all respects favour- 
able to the supposition. We want to see,' says Dr. 
Alexander, ' that they are in harmony with each other ; 
that the statements they contain are credible ; that the 
doctrines they teach are not foolish, immoral, or self- 
contradictory ; that their authors really assumed to be 
under the Divine direction in what they wrote, and 
afibrded competent proofs of this to those around them.'^ 
' Kitto's Bib. CycL, art. * Canon.' 



THE YEEIFYING FACULTY. 85 

But all this clearly supposes the exercise of a verifying 
faculty. 

The facts of the present day, as they come under our 
own observation, are all confirmatory. It is 'the wise' 
only who ' understand.' The peasant is, in this respect, 
often far before the philosopher. Everything depends 
on the moral condition of the recipient. Who ever 
knew a man under the dominant influence of pride able 
either to comprehend or to estimate the moral dignity 
of humility ? When was a supremely selfish man alive 
to the duty of self-sacrifice ? Where do we find men 
full of ignorance and conceit — to say nothing of spiritual 
things — able to judge the value of a great work of art, 
or to pronounce on the merits of some marvellous pro- 
duction of science or of statesmanship ? 

But here a paradox appeais. It is this. The light of 
which we speak — the quickening and elevating power 
in the strength of which we are to recognize the Divine 
— is never attained except by spiritual culture efiected 
through the instrumentality of the revelation itself 
The Book to be recognized and obeyed nmst itself have 
more or less educated the consciousness which is to 
accept it. The word is 'the sword of the Spirit,' and 
the same Lord who says, ' He that is of the truth heareth 
My voice,' says also, ' I am the Truth.' It follows, there- 
fore, that before any man can judge of truth, he must 
receive 'the truth,' believe in it, and be, more or less, 
educated by it. 

Yet, after all, this is not more paradoxical than the 
kindred fact that before a man can judge as to the 
merits of a great artist, he must, to some extent, be 
educated by the artist; or, to take a wider illustration, 



86 LIBER LIBEOEIJM. 

that a man must himself become civilised before he can 
perceive how great a blessing civilisation is. 

That this way of looking at the matter makes the 
evidence for the truth of the Bible mainly subjective 
cannot be disputed ; but nothing else in the present day 
appears to have much hold on men. It may indeed 
seriously be doubted whether it is now possible to bring 
forward any evidence, in favour of miracles for instance, 
which could reasonably be expected to satisfy an uncon- 
cerned spectator, and still less an opponent. 

In the days of our Lord and His apostles, the miracle 
was evidence that the teacher was from God. Now, the 
doctrine must give probability to the miracle. The 
mere fact that ' wonders were wrought ' by the apostles, 
could this be demonstrated, would of itself avail little 
to convince any man of the truth of what they taught. 
ISTor perhaps ought it to be otherwise. It is only when 
coupled with other considerations, such as the character 
of the Christian miracles, their simplicity, benevolence, 
and unselfish ends, that the force of the argument 
founded on them comes to be felt. Well and wisely has 
it been remarked that ' the entire series of miracles re- 
corded by the Evangelists, consummated as they were 
by the miracle of Christ's resurrection, occupy a place 
of perpetual efficacy in relation separately to each of the 
great purposes for which the Lord of Life came amongst 
us, viz. as Saviour of the world, as Redeemer of His 
people, and as Conqueror in the world of spirits.'^ In 
each of these particulars the miracles attest His mission, 
and are in all respects congruous w^ith His teaching. 
The observation of these characteristics is the result of 
* Restoration of Belief, p. 265. 



THE VEKTFYING FACULTY. 87 

the application of ' the verifying faculty ' to the miracles 
of the New Testament generally. 

Of all the miracles, however, the resurrection of Christ, 
involving as it does our own rising again, is the one on 
the fact of which most turns ; for resurrection does not 
signify existence elsewhere under diiFerent conditions — it 
is the renewal of the old. It is the reconstitution of 
humanity, accompanied in each individual by a sense of 
identity : with the remembrance of a past, as well as 
the consciousness of a future. Everything in Christi- 
anity hangs on the resurrection of Christ. *It knows 
Christ only as risen : the only reason of its own exis- 
tence that it recognises is the resurrection. The only 
claim the apostles set forth for preaching it is, that their 
Master who was crucified was alive once more.' No 
supposed delusion can account for this belief that Christ 
rose from the dead. If that which is asserted in Scrip- 
ture regarding it be not true, the whole is a rank ini- 
posture. Either there was a crucified and risen Christ 
long before any part of the New Testament was written, 
or the book that asserts this to have been the case is a 
fraud. The New Testament emphatically is based on 
Christ, not Christ on it. 

It may indeed be said that, in relation to miracle, 
there is no room for the exercise of a verifying faculty, 
since miracles are simply impossible^ the laws of nature 
being incapable of violation. If it be so, the laws of 
nature are more powerful than their Creator, which is 
simply absurd. 

One thing, however, is quite certain — the admission 
of the supernatural is essential to the acceptance of any 
Divine revelation whatever ; for revelation, if anything 



88 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

at all, is itself a miracle. Christianity being what it is, 
and its announcements what they profess to be, ' miracles 
are necessary to the justification of such announcements, 
which indeed, unless they are supernatural truths, are 
the wildest delusions,' A man's faith in the Bible may 
not indeed consciously rest on miracles, but it cannot be 
a genuine faith unless he admits their reality, since, if 
not true, the assertion of them discredits everything else 
that the book contains. 

Yet why should so much be said about miracles be- 
ing violations of law ? It is by no means so clear that 
a miracle is a violation of law. ' We ourselves,' says a 
recent writer, ' formerly had no belief in miracles, be- 
cause we saw no evidence of supernatural powers work- 
ing in the natural world; but when asked if we had 
ever seriously looked for any evidence of this kind, we 
were obliged to confess we had not ; and were aston- 
ished to find that, or seeking with a will^ there was 
abundant evidenca in the history of humanity. . . . The 
action of supernatural forces upon mind and matter is 
necessarily as simple and as much in harmony with 
general laws as the action of natural forces upon mind 
and matter ; the only difference being that the actors 
in one case are inhabitants of this natural world, while, 
in other cases, they are inhabitants of the supernatural 
world. 

' Those who refuse to look for evidence of super- 
natural forces and phenomena, delude themselves and 
their followers by a false play of words. They very 
properly refuse to credit stories about '' arbitrary inter- 
ferences with eternal laws of nature;" and then most 
improperly presume not only to know which are and 



THE VERIFYINa FACULTY. 89 

which are not eternal laws of nature, but also to affirm 
that all miraculous and supernatural phenomena must 
necessarily be " arbitrary interferences with eternal 
laws/' 

'If a man kills a bird, or causes a tree to wither and 
die by the aid of natural forces, it is not deemed an 
arbitrary interference; but if Christ causes a barren fig 
tree to wither and die by the aid of supernatural forces, 
it is an arbitrary interference with eternal laws. If a 
man is struck dead by lightning it is not an arbitrary 
interference ; but if Ananias fall dead at the feet of the 
Apostle Peter it is an arbitrary interference and there- 
fore incredible. Such modes of reasoning engender 
pestilent fallacies. It is well known that superior forces 
can displace inferior forces without any arbitrary inter- 
ference with immutable laws ; and therefore the real 
question to be examined is^the existence of supernatural 
forces and phenomena^ whether in accordance with 
known or unknown laws." 

Yet even here discrimination is needed. If the 
tendency of some minds is to universal scepticism in 
relation to the supernatural, that of others is to the 
credulous acceptance of almost everything professing 
to be of this character. Hence the necessity for a veri- 
fying faculty in man, which, apart altogether from 
ordinary investigation, should judge that which pro- 
fesses to be spiritual by a spiritual standard. 'False 
prophets,' says our Lord to His disciples ' shall arise, 
and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, 
if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect ' 
(Matt. xxiv. 24). St. John in the Apocalypse, too, 
* Philosophy of Religion. By Hugh Dohertj, M. D. 



90 LIBER LIBEOUUM. 

however obscurely, speaks of a time when ' spirits of 
devils ' (demons) will go forth ' working miracles ' 
(Rev. xvi. 14). Again, he describes an apostate who 
should 'deceive them that dwell on the earth by the 
means of those miracles which he had power to do ' 
(Rev. xiii. 14). The security against such deceivers is 
not to be found in scepticism— for sceptics are often 
singularly credulous, and commonly more or less super- 
stitious — but in that verifying faculty which is by John 
identified with the 'anointing' Christians receive from 
Him who abideth in them. 

That, as a rule, mankind should be only too ready 
to believe in the supernatural is not surprising. The 
great silence of God when oppression and wrong are 
rampant in the earth, is often a severe trial to the faith 
even of the best. Hence the singular proneness of most 
persons to judge hastily, and to interpret rashly both 
providences and predictions. The human mind cannot 
be bounded by time; it ever longs to pierce the in- 
visible. Here, too, therefore, is to be found abundant 
scope for the exercise of that spiritual insight which is 
the true verifying faculty, as much when it restrains as 
when it enlightens. 



CHAPTER IV. 

MANY AUTHORS, BUT ONE BOOK. 

We propose now to revert to a peculiarity of the 
Bible which was incidentally referred to in a preceding 
chapter, but not dwelt upon as it deserves to be, viz., 
the marvellous unity which subsists between its differ- 
ent parts. 

Scripture, as we all know, is a collection of tracts, 
the work of above thirty authors, who utter what they 
have to say, not contemporaneously, but in succession, 
and along a vast line of time, say 1,600 years. Yet, in 
spite of this, we all feel it to be one Book. We do 
so because, explain it as we may, we see, as Mr. De 
Quincy says, that ' all the writers combine to one end, 
and lock, like parts of a great machine, into one system.' 
On this peculiarity the argument has been founded — 
and it is a weighty one — ^that inasmuch as concert in 
the writers was impossible, the unity in question places 
the Bible in a position altogether distinct from that of 
any other book ; and seems at least to justify the as- 
sumption that its preparation under Divine direction is, 
in some sense or other, and in a very high sense too, a 
great fact. 

We turn to the Book, then, in order to discover 
whether that which has been asserted regarding its 
unity amid diversity is true, or only a fancy. 



92 ' LIBER LIBROETJM. 

The first sentence that meets the eye consists of ten 
pregnant words : ' In the beginning God created the 
heavens and the earth ; ' words that involve an utter 
denial of the Pagan doctrine of the eternity of matter, 
and an equally positive denial of the Pantheistic theory 
that God is but the soul of the universe. For they 
aifirm most positively: first, that in some far distant 
period — how distant we know not — the world in which 
we live had a beginning ; and next, that He who created 
it is altogether distinct from it, a personal God, endowed 
with Almighty power and infinite wisdom. On this 
assertion all subsequent revelation clearly proceeds. 

The successive stages of that wondrous process, by 
which order sprang out of chaos, light out of darkness, 
and sea and land, sun and moon, grass and herb, beast 
and fowl, and finally man and woman, came into exist- 
ence, is next brought under notice. Then follows the 
story of the Garden and the Fall ; the expulsion from 
Eden ; the birth of Cain ; the murder of Abel ; the 
longevity and rapid increase of mankind; the equally 
rapid growth of wickedness ; and, after abundant warn- 
ing, the final destruction of a sinful race in waters from 
which Noah and his family are alone preserved. 

Other records of the world's earliest history have we 
none. The question is therefore an important one. Can 
this be depended upon ? The momentous point is, not 
whether everything recorded is to be taken in its most 
literal acceptation, for this, we have already seen, is not 
essential to trustworthiness ; but whether the narrative 
can be depended upon in that higher sense which im- 
plies the truest impression that, under the circumstances, 
could be produced on mankind as a whole. This is 



MANY AUTHORS, BUT ONE BOOK. 93 

essential. If a writer intentionally leaves a false im- 
pression, his work is fraudulent and worthless. Further, 
if a narrative be in spirit untrue, nothing stable can be 
built upon it; for what is any erection worth that rests 
only on a quicksand ? But — and to this attention should 
be specially directed — the narrative before us is either a 
foundation or it is nothing. All that follows evidently 
rests upon it. Its essential accuracy is taken for granted 
by every subsequent writer, and if the truthfulness of it 
be even doubtful, the entire volume of revelation is 
doubtful too. 

Let us take, then, first, the seven brief chapters of 
whose contents we have been speaking, and examine 
them narrowly. In doing this it is scarcely possible to 
fail in perceiving two leading elements : an historic ele- 
ment mingling with a didactic one ; and a supernatural 
element involving both miraculous occurrences and pre- 
dictions relating to the future. 

The first element (the historic) embraces the actual 
narrative regarded as true, and equally true^ whether 
any portion of it be veiled in allegory or not, whether 
it be a literal narrative, or only ' an inspired psalm of 
creation,' The didactic associated with it, is involved in 
passages such as those which deny the eternity of matter; 
affirm the personality of the Creator; imply a day of 
rest; or exhibit the probationary character of human 
existence, as it appears in the test to which our first 
parents were subjected, and in the great lesson involved 
therein, that he who had just been created in the image 
of God, and invested with power over every living thing, 
must, before he could govern well, learn implicitly to 
obey; in the relation established between man and 



94 LIBER LIBEORUM. 

woman ; in the representation given us of the tempter, 
viz., as an animal only, endowed indeed with high in- 
tellect, but without a ruhng conscience, without any 
sense of duty, or anything corresponding to unselfish 
affection ; in the trial of obedience being found, not in 
one great act of self-sacrifice, but in daily and hourly 
resistance to temptation regarding an apparent trifle, 
and this without being able to perceive the reason or the 
usefulness of the self-denial demanded ; in the retribution 
which follows sin ; in the confimunication of an evil 
nature to descendants ; in the institution of sacrifices, 
bloody or unbloody ; and in the final sweeping away of 
the wicked from the earth they had filled with violence. 
These are the great lessons which, embodied in the his- 
tory, form what may be called the didactic element. 

The second (the supernatural) is seen in the original 
act of creation, in the temptation by a speaking serpent, 
and in the desolations of the flood. 

Now, as we advance, we shall have to notice how 
these con'ibined elements go to make up all that we 
regard as sacred writings, whether directly inspired or 
only providentially preserved ; how they run through 
each separate portion of the books, and how each of 
these elements in particular connects itself with that 
which has gone before. It will soon be obvious that 
the value or worthlessness of all that is uttered depends 
entirely on the truthfulness, or otherwise, of the basis 
on which it rests. 

We pass on, therefore, to the consideration of the 
new world as it emerges from the waters. God remem- 
bers Noah ; the windows of heaven are closed ; the 
waters subside ; the Ark rests on Ararat, and its inmates 



MANY AUTHORS, BUT ONE BOOK. 95 

come forth. In process of time Ham is cursed and Shem 
and Japheth blessed. Again mankind multiply ; a great 
empire springs into existence ; language is confounded, 
and nations, differing in speech, plant themselves in all 
parts of the earth. 

The elements already noticed reappear. The historic 
runs through the whole, whether certain portions be 
regarded as literal or figurative. The didactic mingling 
therewith appears in the recognition of seven days as a 
division of time ; in the renewal of sacrifice ; in the for- 
bidding to eat anything while living; in the declaration 
that whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his 
blood be shed; in the command to be fruitful and mul- 
tiply, sanctifying marriage; and in the drunkenness of 
Noah, inculcating moderation and circumspection in the 
use even of Divine gifts. The supernatural is seen in 
the safety of the Ark and its inhabitants, and in the 
preservation and distribution of the animals. The pre- 
dictive, as a branch of the supernatural, appears in the 
curse on Canaan, and in the blessing on his brethren. 

Here, then, we have the second course of stones^ so to 
speak, needful to the formation of that great mystical 
temple of truth, which is now rising from the ground ; 
and nothing can be more obvious than that this second 
course rests upon, and dovetails into, the first. 

The calling of Abram, that of him might be made a 
great nation ; the story of his wanderings; the history 
of Isaac and Jacob ; and the settlement in Egypt, bring 
us to the close of the book of Genesis. Need it be said 
that this gives us, in the form of history, the only ac- 
count of patriarchal times that the world possesses? 
And how wonderfully vivid and natural it is ! What 



96 LIBER LEBRORUM. 

light it throws on the early movements of mankind ; 
upon the birth of empires ; upon the moral state of a 
race living chiefly on traditions ! What pictures of a 
nomadic life, not so very different from that of the 
modern Arab of the desert ! What an insight into the 
Egypt of antiquity ! What a photograph of the world 
as it was four thousand years ago ! 

In the didactic portion let us observe the character 
and elevation of the teaching. First, the danger as 
well as sin of deceit and falsehood is exemplified in 
Abram's duplicity both towards Pharaoh and the king 
of Gerar; in Isaac's conduct under similar circum- 
stances ; in Jacob's dealings with Esau ; and in Rebe- 
kah's treachery towards her husband. Let us observe, 
too, how the sin in each case involves a cowardly dis- 
trust of God, and an attempt to justify the evil on the 
ground that good would come of it, as if the Divine 
purposes could either be forwarded or thwarted by 
human fraud and deceit. 

Next we may observe how the duty of unselfishness, 
of yielding rather than striving even for a right, is 
exemplified by Abraham in his dealings with Lot, and 
by Isaac with tlie herdmen of Gerar. Then w^e have 
the folly of worldliness exhibited in Lot's selection of a 
dwelling-place, without regard to its moral atmosphere, 
while the power of faith and the beauty of self-sacrifice 
is seen in the oflfering of Isaac.^ The spirit of a dignified " 

^ * TUe offering ' — i. e. tlie giving him up cheerfully to God either 
for life or death. The word ' offering ' {plal})^ it has been suggested, 
does not necessarily imply a 'burnt offering,' as our translators 
have it. And it is certainly v^orth notice that no command is given 
to Abraham to slay liis son, or to take with him wood, or fire, or 



MANY AUTHORS, BUT ONE BOOK. 97 

liberality is manifested by Abraham in the purchase of 
the field of Ephron the Hittite ; his disinterestedness in 
his conduct after the victory over the kings ; and his 
prudent forethought in the marriage of Isaac. The 
odiousness of oppression comes out in the history of 
Laban's transactions with Jacob ; of cruelty in the con- 
knife. Abraham, doubtless, inferred that God intended him to kill 
his child, and he was ready for the sacrifice, ' accounting that God 
was able to raise him up even from the dead, from whence also he 
received him in a figure.' But this does not prove that the infer- 
ence was a right one. It certainly seems incredible that God should, 
under any circumstances, or for any purpose, command Abraham to 
imitate the heathen, and bid him do an act which He Himself sub- 
sequently pronounced an abomination (Deut. xii. 31). That the 
patriarch was not permitted to carry out his intentions is only what 
might have been expected ; while the spirit of faith, obedience, and 
self-sacrifice, which was involved in his willingness to resign Isaac, 
was not the less approved and rewarded. 

Another suggestion has been thrown out by Dean Stanley, viz., 
the possibility that the impression Abraham received that God 
wished him to slay his son, although permitted and overruled, came 
from Satan rather than from the Lord ; that Satan's design "was to 
show, as in the case of Job, that there was a limit beyond which 
Abraham's faith and obedience would not go — the result proving 
the sincerity and the power of the godly man's faith, for the exercise 
of which he was blessed of God more emphatically than ever. This 
theory is supposed to find support from the fact that in the second 
book of Samuel (xxiv. 1) the Lord is said to have moved David to 
say, * Go, number Israel and Judah,' while the same act is in the first 
book of Chronicles (xxi. 1) attributed to Satan: 'And Satan stood 
up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.'^ It is 
every way uncandid and unworthy of a Christian man to assume 
that either of these suppositions has originated in a sinful unwil- 
lingness to receive Bible statements as they stand. Rather are they 
occasioned by a holy fear of attributing to God a command to do any- 
thing which He Himself has pronounced evil. 
5 



98 LIBER LIBEORTJM. 

duct of Simeon and Levi toward tho Shechemites. 
The nobility of forgiveness is shown by Esau when he 
meets his brother ; the power of prayer in the interces- 
sion of Abram for Sodom, and in the mystic wrestle of 
Jacob with the angel; and, finally, the retributive jus- 
tice of God in the sorrows of Jacob, and in the distress 
of Joseph's brethren when brought before his face in 
Egypt. To say that this teaching is elevated is to say 
little. To suppose that it is the work of any fraudulent 
person, imposing upon the world a pretended revelation, 
is simply extravagant and absurd. 

The predictive element enlarges as we proceed. In 
the covenant with Abraham ; in the promise made to 
him and to his descendants ; in the various renewals of 
the covenant; in the dying blessings of Isaac and Jacob; 
in the childish dreams of Joseph about himself and his 
brethren ; and in his later prophecies regarding the 
butler and the baker, and respecting the seven years' 
famine, we see the same claim to the power of foreseeing 
future events put forward, which we observed in the 
earlier portion. The supernatural, in all its forms, 
rather increases than diminishes. The plaguing of 
Pharaoh'B house on account of Sarah; the appearance 
and conversation of the angels at the door of Abram's 
tent; the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah; the 
smoking furnace and the burning lamp; the birth of 
Isaac ; the vision of Abiraelech ; the voice to Hagar ; 
Jacob's dream at Haran ; his vision of God's host ; and, 
above all, the marvellous separation of this one family 
from all other peoples, are events which, if in any sense 
true, are certainly supernatural. 

Observe, too, how all these events grow naturally out 



BUT ONE BOOK. 99 

of those that had preceded them. The tendency to 
corruption after the deluge had been shown at Babel ; it 
had, as the nations multiplied, spread far and wide ; it 
was needful that this tendency should be corrected, for 
there was a modified idolatry even in a family like 
Laban's, and atrocious wickedness had been manifested 
in Sodom and Gomorrah. The world was morally 
sinking, yet it had not altogether sunk, for both Pharaoh 
and Abimelech fear God ; Melchisedek is a patriarchal 
priest, before whom Abraham bows ; and Joseph though 
a prince of Egypt, recognises and serves the God of his 
fathers. The very wickedness that is committed by 
the various members or connections of the chosen 
family : the incest of Lot ; the treacherous murder of 
the Shechemites in revenge for the violence of the son 
of Hamor; the sin of Reuben; the selling of Joseph by 
his brethren ; their falsehood to their father ; the dis- 
obedience of Er and Onan ; the wickedness of Judah, 
and the folly of Tamar, all testify to a state of society 
precisely such as might be anticipated on the supposition 
that the world was exactly what it is stated to be. As 
Cain and Abel were but types of classes of their de- 
scendants, so Shem and Ham continually repeat them- 
selves in the best and in the worst of their race. The 
third course of stones^ then, fits exactly to the second, 
and must stand or fall with its predecessors. 

We hasten on to the exodus of the chosen people ; to 
their wanderings through the desert; to the establish- 
ment of the ceremonial law ; and to their settlement in 
Canaan under the leadership of Joshua. This brings 
us to the end of the Pentateuch. Is this also, we ask, 
dependent upon the preceding? Assuredly it is. All 



100 LIBER LIBKOEUM. 

the events narrated spring out of that which has gone 
before, and cannot by any stretch of ingenuity be ex- 
plained without it. 

The same elements again appear. The historic, 
whether the narrative in all its details is always accu- 
rate or not. The didactic, in the addition to the great 
moral principles laid down in former portions, of a code 
of laws adapted to the particular necessities of a pecu- 
liar people. The predictive, in the song of blessing by 
Moses, and in the utterances of Balaam. In a certain 
sense, indeed, the entire ceremonial law, its sacrifices, 
its washings, its symbolic worship, all involve a predic- 
tive element ; for they all seem to point to something 
better than themselves, which in due time should be 
manifested on the earth. The supernatural is indeed 
everywhere. The plagues of Egypt ; the passage of 
the Red Sea ; the fall of the manna ; the flight of 
quails ; the water gushing from the rock ; the giving 
of the law at Mount Sinai ; the deaths of Dathan and 
Abiram, and of Nadab and Abihu ; the pillar of cloud 
by day and of fire by night ; the leprosy of Miriam ; 
the fiery serpents; the cure of the people; and the 
burial of Moses by the Lord Himself: all these things 
come before us, in a form which obliges us either to 
regard them as supernatural events, or, for there is no 
medium, as pure fictions— falsehoods imposed for truth 
on the credulity of mankind ; and if so, they are fatal 
to the character of the entire book in which they are 
found. 

We have seen, then, that the Pentateuch, however 
composed, is unquestionably a unity; that whether it is 
to be invariably regarded as a literal record of events 



MANY AUTHORS, BUT ONE BOOK. 101 

or not, it is essentially historic ; that its morality is of 
the highest ; its general truthfulness self-evident ; its 
simplicity and beauty unrivalled ; and, further, that it 
everywhere involves the supernatural. But there is 
nothing that can make against the supposition that side 
by side with certain distinct and positive Divine revela- 
tions, are found documents providentially selected and 
edited, but not inspired. The predictive element, if 
accepted at all, obliges us to admit the supernatural 
process which we call inspiration, and, in so doing, the 
supernatural element generally. The narrative, on the 
other hand, however historically true, need not for 
many reasons be regarded as in all respects infallible. 
Jewish history, notwithstanding its being found in the 
Bible, is but history after all, and must be judged by a 
very different standard from that which belongs to 
directly inspired communications. We accept it, rather 
in consequence of the connection in which it stands, 
and the general character of the book in which it is 
embodied, than on account of any direct proof we can 
by possibility have of its entire accuracy. 

But this is of little moment, so long as we feel confi- 
dent that it is truthful, and can regard it, in that char- 
acter, as a stable foundation for what follows. Short of 
an absolute denial of the supernatural in all its forms, 
which is simply to deny or to limit God, to refuse Him 
the character of a free agent, and to cut Him off alto- 
gether from direct communication with the creatures 
He has made, it is impossible to find any good or rea- 
sonable ground for denying the general credibility of 
the Pentateuch. But so long as we retain belief in a 
God at all — that is to say, in a personal God, having a 



102 LIBER LIBEORrM. 

character, and therefore capable of being known and 
loved — the possibility at least of the supernatural must 
be admitted. On the other hand, 'If Christianity be 
true historically, its miracles included, and if indeed 
" Christ rose from the dead according to the Scriptures," 
then the writings which bring such facts as these to our 
knowledge will take a place of authority in our mind 
and conscience which, practically, and as to their influ- 
ence in determining our faith and our conduct, must he 
very nearly the same^ whatever may be the theory or the 
opinion we adopt among the many that have been 
advanced concerning inspiration.''^ 

That the later historic portions of the Bible are based 
upon the Pentateuch, that they presuppose the authority 
of the books of Moses, will probably not be disputed. 
Joshua at Shechem recapitulates the leading events 
therein related as the well-known national history of 
the people he is addressing. Others in after times take 
the same course. Not a hint of the possible untrust- 
worthiness of these traditions or documents is to be 
found anywhere. On the contrary, they are always 
regarded as sacred, and they are preserved for the most 
part with a veneration which sometimes degenerates 
into superstition. 

Equally obvious is it that the same characteristics 
which belong to the earlier documents distinguish those 
that follow. The message, whatever it may be, is 
always identical in tone and spirit with that of the five 
books. The voice of the one is the voice of the other. 
The historic, the didactic, the predictive and the mira- 
culous all in turn reappear, and as a rule under the same 
^ The Restoration of Belief, p. 238. 



BUT ONE BOOK. 103 

conditions. Nothing can be plainer than that, whether 
true or false, the later documents are but the natural 
and necessary outgrowth of those which have preceded 
them. 



CHAPTER V. 

JEWISH HISTORY AKD PROPHECY. 

Jewish history, although the history of a peculiarly 
governed people, and therefore of times in which God 
more obviously interfered with human affairs than He 
now does, is, as has been ah-eady observed, but history 
after all ; and there is not a hint in Scripture which 
should lead us to imagine that it was composed under 
any other conditions than those which belong to the 
historian everywhere, who seeks and finds providential 
guidance in his work. 

We have a right, indeed, to suppose that the men 
who, under a theocracy,^ were oiEcially called to write 
or to edit the transactions of the nation, were truthful 
men, honourable and honoured by their countrymen, 
and endowed with high talent if not with special gifts 

^ * Under a theocracy.'' — This phrase is often supposed to imply 
more than it really does. The theocratic form of government under 
which the Jews long lived by no means involved either a continual 
miraculous interference on their behalf, or preservation from any of 
the errors to which mankind are liable. Rather was it such a 'pre- 
sence among them as admitted the possibility — whenever they were in 
a right state of mind — of the wiU of God being ascertained on any 
given question. When they neglected or ceased to care for Divine 
direction it was obviously withheld. Scripture affords abundant 
proof that even before the monarchy the people were often left to 
their own devices. 



JEWISH HISTORY AND PROPHECY. 105 

from above. We know that some of them were so. 
Samuel, Nathan, Gad, Isaiah, and Jeremiah, although 
sometimes historians, were also prophets, men richly- 
endowed with high moral ^nd spiritual qualifications. 
Of Iddo, Ahijah, and Shemaiah ; of the men who wrote, 
or compiled, or condensed from more extended records, 
the books of the Kings and Chronicles, we know less. 
But of this we are assured, that, whether accomplished 
by Ezra or by any other hand, the grand outline we 
have of the history of the ancient people is a compilation 
from documents long since lost; drawn up doubtless 
for religious ends and under the guidance of a wise 
Providence, but never pretending to the character of a 
Divine revelation. It is surely but wilfulness or folly 
to give to these records, invaluable as they are, a 
character which they themselves do not claim, or to say 
of them, what has never been said of any other history, 
that every particular must be infallibly true, or the en- 
tire document is false and worthless. 

That some of these books embody Divine revelations 
is clear enough, if we accept as truthful the frequently 
recurring declaration, ' Thus saith the Lord,' or ' The 
Lord said unto me,' phrases which, when connected 
with direct communications from above, must certainly 
be understood to imply that the speaker claim^s Divine 
authority for what he is saying, and this not the less 
because similar expressions are at other times not unfre- 
quently used in a lower sense, viz. as indicating that the 
writer or speaker believes himself to be uttering that 
which is in accordance with the Divine will. Instances 
of such use may be found in the address of Joshua 
(xxiv. 2) where he is plainly recapitulating history, and 
5* 



106 LIBER LIBROEUM. 

again in the speech of Jotham (Judg. ix. 6-8). David 
also in speaking of Shimei exclaims, ' The Lord hath 
said unto him, Curse David' (2 Sam. xvi. 10), evidently 
meaning the Lord permitted him thus to act. Some of 
the books, indeed, such as those of Esther and of Ruth, 
contain nothing vrhich could not have been written 
without special assistance by any competent person 
acquainted with the facts ; yet these books are essential 
to the completeness of Scripture, and as such are greatly 
to be prized. To insist that they are inspired adds 
nothing to their value. It is but to maintain, what 
every page of Holy Scripture contradicts, that God 
works miraculously when ordinary agencies are every 
way adequate to the accomplishment of the end sought. 

There is not, within the whole compass of Scripture, 
a word to show that Jewish history is inspired in the 
only sense in which that word ought to be used, viz. in 
the sense of the writers having what they wrote super- 
naturally revealed to them, and their being, as a conse- 
quence, infallible. The marvellous fidelitj^ with which 
the faults and the crimes of the greatest and best of the 
kings are recorded, however humbling to the individual 
whose life is described, or to Israel as a nation, certainly 
indicates in the writers a subjection to truth and to God 
perhaps nowhere else to be met with ; but this is no evi- 
dence of Divine inspiration, inasmuch as that which 
they were called upon to record was not the result of 
any special Divine communication, but related to matters 
within human cognizance, and therefore attainable by 
care and industry. 

We have said that ' Jewish history, notwithstanding 
its being found in the Bible, is but history after all •" 
^ Chap. iv. p 101; and also chap. v. p. 104. 



JEWISH HISTORY AND PROPHECY. 107 

and, so far as the facts themselves are concerned, this is 
true. It must not, however, be forgotten that the annals 
in question differ from all others in a particular which 
frequently involves the presence of an inspired element. 
They not only narrate facts — they reveal motives ; they 
sometimes assert that such or such a transaction took 
place for reasons which could only be known to the 
Searcher of Hearts ; they profess at other times to tell 
us authoritatively how such transactions were viewed by 
God, and what relation they had to the secret history, 
the sins or the follies of the actors. 

In ordinary history these things are concealed. The 
motives which have led a man to any given course of 
conduct may, indeed, often be surmised^ but they cannot 
be hnown. The light in which a particular action is 
viewed by the Divine Being may frequently be inferred 
from what we know of His character ; but inasmuch as 
acquaintance with many circumstances connected with 
its performance are almost always out of our reach, the 
inference may be a wrong one. To God alone it belongs 
to weigh spirits and to discern the thoughts and intents 
of the heart. With Him, therefore, exclusively rests the 
ability to form just judgments, or at least to be assured 
that they are so. 

In Jewish history no room is left for doubt of this 
kind. There the most secret thoughts of a man are, 
not always indeed, but oftentimes, unveiled ; the most 
plausible pretences are laid bare, and the most positive 
decisions are given as to the moral quality of the trans- 
action recorded. In such cases we are left in no uncer- 
tainty as to the view God takes of an action, or as to 
the judgment He pronounces upon it. 



108 LIBER LIBEORUM. 

All this, of course, implies that however human or 
fallible the narrative itself may be, inspiration is more 
or less diffused throughout every part of sacred history 
which is intended to show forth the living God moving 
and acting for definite ends among the children of men. 

But this is not all. These annals teach us much that 
otherwise we could not know. They reveal to us the 
great truth that not in Judea only, but in all the world, 
God is ever present ; that whether we discern His Hand 
or not, His power. His wisdom, and His love are per- 
petually manifested in the lives both of nations and indi- 
Tiduals; that a great Divine purpose runs through the 
.ages ; that the Controller of all human affairs, however 
apparently silent, is never absent from the world He 
has created, never regardless of what is going on upon 
its surface. 

Without this light we should not have been able to 
discern the Divine working in many cases where it is 
now quite obvious to us ; we should frequently have 
failed to arrive at either wise or safe conclusions regard- 
ing many things that are now made plain ; we should 
perhaps have doubted altogether whether the Lord was 
indeed ruling among the nations. 

It is this diffused element in the Bible that gives to 
the Book the importance it possesses. It is this breath- 
ing of the Divine — a peculiarity shared by none other — 
that justifies the Regal demand it makes on the submis- 
sion of men to its decisions. Nothing is more certain 
than that if we study the Old Testament aright we shall 
find — as Mr. Maurice well says in his dedication to Mr. 
Erskine of a series of admirable sermons on the Prophets 
and Kings, which he published about fifteen years ago 



JEWISH HISTORY A1^T> PROPHECY. 109 

— that therein is to be read ' an interpretation of some 
of the greatest difficulties in history, aud in the condi- 
tion of the world around us/ 

We must not omit to observe that there appears 
throughout the history a spirit of prophecy which hy oio 
means involves Divine inspiration^ and which is quite 
distinct from that power of predicting future events 
which belonged to so many of the Hebrew seers. Debo- 
rah, Hannah, Saul, nay, whole schools of prophets, from 
time to time appear upon the scene; some, 'like the 
wife of Lapidoth, who, in her song over Sisera, strangely 
intermingling human passion with Divine thanksgiving, 
expresses the popular feeling without much regard to 
the propriety or impropriety of the sentiments uttered ; 
some, like the youthful warrior who chants his ode on 
the dead Saul, apparently blind to the errors of the 
departed king, and attributes to his hero qualities par- 
taking far more of poetic license than of literal truthful- 
ness ;' some, like Hannah, rising out of rejoicings over 
personal mercies into noble strains wherewith to recount 
the goodness of Him, ' who keepeth the feet of His saints, 
breaketh in pieces His adversaries, and exalteth the horn 
of his anointed ;' others, like the crowd who gathered 
about Ahab at Samaria and bade him go up to Ramoth 
Gilead, are spoken of as filled with a lying spirit, prophe- 
sying for mere gain, 'a crust of bread;' sewing 'pil- 
lows under the arm-holes ' of the people, and deluding 
them to their ruin. Here at least any inspiration from 
above is out of the question. 

Not so with other portions. As we advance we come 
in contact with ruling men who, like Elijah, Elisha, and 
other less known seers, are obviously the commissioned 



110 LIBER LIBROEUM. 

servants of the Most High, bidden to speak "before kings 
and peoples in words not their own, but God's, and. 
called for the most part to seal their testimony with 
their blood. By these the faults both of the people and 
their rulers — their idolatries, their cruelties, their super- 
stitions — are unsparingly exposed, and the calamities 
that retributively followed their sins are always recog- 
nised as Divine judgments, and fulfilments of Mosaic 
predictions such as those with which the book of Deu- 
teronomy closes. 

The constant theme of these men is, ' To what pur- 
pose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me ? saith 
the Lord. Wash you, make you clean ; put away the 
evil of your doings from before Mine eyes ; cease to do 
evil; learn to do well' (Isa. i. 11-17). Whenever cere- 
monial rites are put in the place of truth and duty they 
refuse to be silent. Kings, priests, and people by turns 
receive rebuke at their hands, in everything the true 
prophet showing himself to be the messenger of God. 
' Is not this the fast that I have chosen ? to loose the 
bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to 
let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every 
yoke ? ' (Isa. Iviii. 5, 6.) 

Further, there runs through the prophecies of these 
men a long series of predictions^ which can by no 
alchemy whatever be interpreted otherwise than as 
relating to a distant future and to a coming King under 
whom the world should be happy. Nor is it easy to 
sever this great monarch from ' the seed of the woman ' 
that was to bruise the head of the serpent ; from that 
descendant of Abraham in whom ' all the nations of the 
earth ' were to be blessed ; or from the prophet whom 



JEWISH HISTORY AND PROPHECY. Ill 

the Lord said unto Moses He would ' raise up of his 
brethren ' like unto Him. 

It is this, and the good time connected therewith, 
which imparts so peculiar a tone and color to all Hebrew 
prophecy. It is this, as Dean Stanley truly says, that 
'gives to the Bible at large that hopeful, victorious, 
triumphant character which distinguishes it from the 
morose, querulous, narrow, and desponding spirit of so 
much false religion ancient and modern. " To one far 
off Divine event the whole creation moves." ' That 
event — the restoration and happiness of the race under 
Messiah — is the ever-recurring theme of the Jewish 
prophets. With a striking prediction of the glorious 
time when this ' Sun of Righteousness shall rise with 
healing in His wings ' the last of the seers closes at 
once his own message and the Old Testament. 

Need it be said that such predictions if not ' God- 
breathed ' are worse than useless. Professing to be, in 
the highest sense. Divine, they are either truly so, or 
else mere outbursts of frantic and fraudulent enthusiasm. 
If the former, the very words are the words of holy men, 
speaking ' as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.' If 
the latter, language has no terms strong enough where- 
with to denounce such wicked and mischievous impostors. 

These prophecies may occasionally be very obscure 
or very coarse ; they may at one time descend to a 
familiarity that startles us, and at another rise to a sub- 
limity that is actually overpowering ; it may often be 
exceedingly difficult to separate the voice which refers 
to its own day, from that which points to a far distant 
future : but whether clear or dark, whether familiar or 
sublime, whether referring to the near or to the distant. 



112 LIBER LIBROEUM. 

they stand alone ; as compositions unmatched ; in 
beauty without a rival ; in purity unapproachable : at 
once terrible and tender ; often mystic and mournful, 
yet ever redolent of joy and triumph. 

The Psalms occupy a position of their own. The 
Psalter is, as Tholuck says, the book from which ' Piety, 
whether Jewish or Christian, if genuine, has derived 
more nourishment than from any other source. In the 
greater portion of reformed churches they serve as 
spiritual songs ; the Catholic priest daily prays them in 
his breviary ; and, bound with many editio*ns of the 
New Testament, they form the book of devotion of 
Protestants. When our Lord instituted the Holy Sup- 
per, He sang psalms with His apostles. He testified to 
His disciples that the traits of His fate were delineated 
in the Psalms. He referred His opponents to a pro- 
phetic psalm as inspired by the Holy Ghost. The extent 
to which His humiliation and exaltation were, mirror- 
like, beheld by Him in the Psalms may be illustrated by 
the fact that, even on the Cross, when expressing the 
desertion of His soul. He used not His own words, but 
adopted the language of His typical ancestor.'^ 

In this, as in other poetic books, all historic references 
accord with previously recognised documents. The 
doctrine or ethics of the Psalms is in exact accordance 
with that which had preceded them. Herder says, 
' There is no attribute, no perfection of God left unex- 
pressed in the simplest and most powerful manner in 
the Psalms and the Prophets.' Throughout indeed the 
Old Testament the typical or prefigurative continually 
appears, ' every pious man who suffered for God's cause 
^ Tholuck, Introd. to Oomm. on the Psahns. 



JEWISH HISTORY AND PROPHECY. 113 

under the ancient economy, but triumphed at last, being 
regarded as a type of what should be fulfilled in Christ ; 
just as the entire sacrificial institutions as well as other 
phenomena have a like reference.' 

But does it follow, if this typical character be ad- 
mitted, that every book in which it is found must be 
from first to last inspired of God ? We cannot see why 
this should be assumed. That the Bible, in consequence 
of the peculiarity of its structure ; its mysterious unity ; 
the perpetual murmur of the Infinite which is ever issu- 
ing from its pages ; in its revelations and in its reti- 
cence ; in what it says and in what it withholds, is 
singularly unlike any other book, cannot be disputed. 
That the Divine breath animates it as a whole ; that the 
Divine mind has controlled its formation, just as the 
same Divine mind controls and regulates all our afiairs ; 
that just as each separate human life, while perfectly 
free, is yet continually directed by an unseen hand (a 
thread of the supernatural running through it), so this 
written embodiment of the life of Humanity growing 
through the ages, is moulded by One who has made it 
what it is, is certain. But how this fact should be sup- 
posed to carry with it the infallibility of every utterance 
in the sense of perfect accuracy as to dates and num- 
bers, and absolute approval of every action recorded 
which is not distinctly disclaimed, it is assuredly diffi- 
cult to see. 

Paley justly observes, ' This is to make Christianity 
answerable with its life for the circumstantial truth of 
each separate passage, the genuineness of every book, 
and for the information, fidelity, and judgment of every 
writer in it.' 



CHAPTER VI. 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



That the New Testament opens upon us as a develop- 
ment of the Old can scarcely be denied by any honest 
man. When John the Baptist appears, his message is, 
' Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.' But no 
one asks the question, ' What kingdom ?' because they 
fully understood him to be speaking of that which had 
so long formed the theme of prophetic anticipations. 
Their views regarding this kingdom might be, as they 
certainly were, in many respects very defective ; for they 
looked forward to it apart altogether from any moral or 
spiritual change, and supposed that it would be * of the 
earth and earthy.' Nevertheless, it was this gospel of 
the kingdom, purified indeed from carnality, and con- 
nected with the resurrection, that the Apostles were 
directed to preach, first to the Jew, and then to the 
Gentile ; themselves ever living by faith in the happy 
expectation of the Redeemer's return, to ' build again 
the tabernacle of David, and to set it up, that the residue 
(the rest or remainder) of men might seek after the 
Lord' (Acts xv. 16-17). 

Everywhere in the New Testament, directly or in- 
directly, the authority of the great lawgiver is recog- 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 115 

nised. Rites and institutes, circumcision* and the sab- 
bath, the passover and the feast of Tabernacles, all 
commemorate events which, if they never occurred, 
could not, by any possibility, have become national 
memorials. The legislation of the land is in great 
measure that of the wilderness ; to honour Moses is to 
every Jew living in apostolic days the first of duties; 
to be a child of Abraham the highest of privileges. All 
this of course supposes that, at that time^ the Pentateuch 
was regarded as historic, in the sense of being trust- 
worthy. 

Christ Himself distinctly declares that He came not 
to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfil 
them. He always refers to the Old Testament, and 
especially to the Pentateuch, as the recognised history 
of the people. ' Have you never read,' He asks, on one 
occasion, ' what God said to Moses at the bush ?' On 
another, ' What did Moses command you ?' On a third, 
^ If ye believed Moses ye would believe on Me V The 
Flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the 
falling of the manna, the giving of the law, the eleva- 
tion of the brazen serpent, are each and all referred to 
in the New Testament as well-known facts ; and Noah, 
Lot, Jonah, David, Job, Balak, Balaam, and others, are 
mentioned as historical personages. 

* * Circumcision.'' — This, although peculiarly, was not eocclusiveVy 
a Jewish rite. It has been found to prevail extensively both in 
ancient and modern times. It is all but universal among Mohamme- 
dans. It belonged to the Jew as to no other people, by its having 
been appointed or adopted as a sign of the covenant Grod made with 
Abraham. It was practised in Egypt, but not during the forty 
years' sojourn in the wilderness (Josh. v. 5). — Smith's Dictionary. 



116 lilBER LKRORUM. 

Stephen^ in his defence, recapitulates — althougli, as we 
have it, apparently not with perfect accuracy — Jewish 
history. Paul^ before Agrippa, insists that he was only 
teaching the approach of what Moses and the prophets 
had said should come. In his address to the Jews he 
reminds them how God called them out of Egypt. In 
his epistles he refers to the lowly origin of the nation — 
to ' the hole of the pit ' out of which it was digged. He 
reminds them how the serpent beguiled Eve ; how 
Abraham met Melchisedek ; how the law was given %o 
Moses ; how they were baptised unto Moses in the cloud 
and in the sea ; how they lusted in the wilderness ; how 
they drank of the rock that was smitten ; how, from 
Abel downwards, the just had lived by faith. Peter ^ in 
like manner, refers to the Deluge, to the conduct of Lot, 
and to that of Balaam. John speaks of Cain and Abel. 
James of Abraham. Jude of Sodom and Gomorrah ; 
while the imagery of the Apocalypse, when narrowly 
examined, is found to be a curiously wrought piece of 
Mosaic made up from the older prophets. 

The same facts and doctrines everywhere reverberate. 
The elements which combine in the New Testament are 
precisely the same as those which characterise the Old. 
The historic, mingling with the didactic, runs through 
the Gospels, the Acts, and the Epistles. The predictive 
is seen in the message of the angel to Mary ; in the song 
of Elizabeth ; in the teachings of the Baptist ; in the 
sayings of the Lord, and in that wondrous prophecy 
which concludes the book. The supernatural appears 
in miracles without end, wrought, not only by Christ 
and His apostles, but also by their more immediate 
converts. 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 117 

Nor is the morality of the New Testament, as has 
frequently been asserted, different from that of the Old. 
The ancient commandment is but developed and spi- 
ritualised by the Lord Jesus. Nothing is superseded 
but that which had been ordained or modified in order 
to meet for a time the peculiar condition of a half 
civilised people. These ordinances, whether relating 
to slavery or divorce, to polygamy or concubinage, to 
judicial retaliation, or to an exclusive nationality, being 
temporary in character, and borne with for a time in 
order to avoid greater evils, were to pale and pass away 
before the higher light brought in by the Redeemer of 
the world. But it is monstrous to speak, as some do, 
of the God of Moses as being different or inferior to the 
God of Isaiah, or of both suffering eclipse before the 
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. 

God is One, and His character is One ; but man varies 
with circumstances ; and according to those circum- 
stances God deals with him ; giving truth, like every- 
thing else, only as men are able to bear it, and adapting 
His enactments to conditions under which higher forms 
of law would be impracticable, and the attempt to 
enforce them would only lead to greater mischiefs than 
legislation could rectify. In this sense the Mosaic 
dispensation is a different dispensation from that of 
Christ, its ruleSj promises, and system being different, 
though the Author and the End of both dispensations 
is the same. 

Other elements, equally characteristic, might be 
traced running through the v^hole volume^ were it needful 
to point them out. One in particular may be noticed, 
viz., the greater favour shown to some above others. We 



118 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

are accustomed to call these preferences instances of 
Divine sovereignty, simply because they exhibit to us 
God acting in a way we do not quite understand, and 
loithout giving us any reason for what He does. The 
acceptance of Isaac and the rejection (though not 
without a blessing) of Ishmael ; the choice of Jacob 
over Esau even before birth — -though Esau has His 
blessing too ; the selection of Joseph to be ruler over 
Egypt and the saviour of his family ; of Judah, to be 
eventually the governing tribe ; the elevation of Saul ; 
the subsequent choice of David : these, and many other 
instances, clearly indicate a great purpose running 
through the ages, in which men are but the instruments 
of higher power. 

In the New Testament, this exercise of Divine sove- 
reignty rises into a doctrine — that of election — and is 
expounded as such, first by Christ and afterwards by 
the great apostles of the Gentiles. Need it be observed 
that, as a great fact of life^ explain it as we may, the 
giving to one, and withholding from another meets us at 
every turn, whether we recognise the hand of God in it 
or not. 

Many other unities might be noticed. If in the Old 
Testament as a fact Cain's offering is rejected because 
he is hating his brother, in the New the doctrine is laid 
down, man must first be reconciled unto his brother, 
and then come and offer his gift. If in the Old Testa- 
ment Abraham fights bravely for Lot, while Isaac 
yields his rights rather than contend for them, the coun- 
terpart appears in the teaching of the later dispensation, 
that while the man of God is not to strive, but to over- 
come evil by good, the soldier may remain in his calling, 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 119 

and the magistrate is not to bear the sword in vain. 
Under each dispensation the Jacobs with all their sins 
and weaknesses are regarded as more godly than the 
Esaus with their rude and manly virtues. The standard 
is the same under both covenants; in each, however, 
differing very widely from that which any uninspired 
man would have laid down. Why a life of faith should 
be accepted as covering so many faults — explicable 
enough to the spiritual man — is an enigma which the 
world never could, and, on its own principles, never can 
explain. 

Further, of all in the Bible that, properly speaking, 
constitutes the Word of God, that is, the written Word, 
whether found in the Old Testament or in the New, 
Christ the incarnate Word is at once the centre and the 
substance. In Him it is all embodied. Around Him 
all that is written radiates. Some, indeed, have asserted 
that, in a certain sense. He typifies the written Word ; 
that the human element in Scripture is to the Book 
what human nature was to the Divine Logos ; that in 
the Word written, as in the Word made flesh, the human 
and the Divine meet without any interference with 
infallibility. But this can only be affirmed of those 
portions of the Bible which really constitute Divine 
revelation. In these^ as in other parts, although in a very 
different sense, there is a human element^ but it is one 
which in no way interferes with infallibility. In Jewish 
history, however true or important it may be, nothing 
is to be found corresponding to that union of the Divine 
and human which was manifested in Christ. 

But some will say, This is too general : come to par- 
ticulars, and tell us plainly whether or no you regard 



120 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

tlie Gospels as inspired. If so, is it in whole or in part ? 
Further, state distinctly in what light you regard the 
Acts, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse. 

We see no reason to object to such a question, nor do 
we imagine that, on the principles already laid down, a 
straightforward reply is to be shunned. Everything in 
the Gospels that properly constitutes a revelation is un- 
questionably inspired. The discourses of the Lord must 
be regarded as in substance accurately reported, how- 
ever words may vary, if we believe that, in accordance 
with His promise. He supernaturally brought all things 
that He had said to remembrance, so far as it was need- 
ful or desirable that His exact words should be record- 
ed. As a rule, however, it suffices for all practical 
purposes, that the substance or rather the real purport 
of what was spoken should stand for what was actually 
said. 

The facts^ or what are stated to be such, are to be 
received, like all similar statements, on the authority of 
witnesses, on whose veracity, disinterestedness, and 
good sense, not a shadow of doubt can rest. Surely, 
then, we may approach the evangelical narratives with 
at least as much respect as we show to ordinary writers. 
Surely we are bound to peruse them with at least as 
much candour as we are accustomed to exercise when 
dealing with the productions of any honourable man, 
whether living, or long since dead. Yet how few scep- 
tics are prepared to do this. 

The miracles recorded, if not true narrations of what 
actually took place, serve only to convict the reporters 
of being either credulous or fraudulent men, in which 
case not a word they have written is worthy of a mo- 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 121 

mentis attention from any sensible person. To believe 
this, however, in the face of statements so calm, unex- 
cited, and well balanced as are those of the Gospels ; to 
associate either weakness or falsehood with men who 
suffered and died in defence of truth as truth ; who lived 
above all the conventionalities of their day ; who had 
everything to gain by yielding to popular prejudices and 
to authority in Church and State; who actually lost 
everything, even life itself, by disregarding the wishes 
and commands of the rulers : to believe that these men 
were after all mere charlatans^ certainly requires an 
amount of credulity greater than has yet been mani- 
fested even by the most zealous upholder of lying 
legends. 

The genealogies inserted by Matthew and Luke, 
copied in all probability from the public records, may, 
for aught we can tell, be now quite incapable of recon- 
ciliation. Matthew, when quoting from the Old Testa- 
ment, may only mean by the phrase ' then was fulfilled ' 
that then again became applicable the words of the 
prophet. What are sometimes termed 'obscure and 
incomprehensible prophecies ' in the New Testament 
may he mere allusions to passages in the prophetical 
writings which, by accommodation, illustrate the events 
narrated. ' The writings of the Jewish prophets,' it 
has been truly observed by Mr. Hartwell Home, ' were 
the classics of the later Jews, and in subsequent ages 
all their writers affected allusions to them.' Interpola- 
tions, although of small importance, m^ay here or there 
have crept into the text, and occasional discrepancies 

^ See some observations in the last chapter — * Postscript ' — on ob- 
jections to this dilemma. 
6 



122 LIBEE LIBEORUM. 

can unquestionably be pointed out. But all these things 
become of little or no consequence, if, recognising the 
existence of a human element, we keep in mind the 
great purpose for which the Gospels were written. 
'These things are written that we may believe that 
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing 
we might have life through His name.' He who knows 
that this was the end for which the Gospels were given 
may well feel assured that the means were adequate ; 
that the Giver would not suffer any error to find place 
in them which could interfere with the attainment of 
the end for which they were bestowed.^ 

The developments of doctrine put forth after Pente- 
cost, by Paul and others, whether in the Acts or the 
Epistles, their advices, commands, and exhortations, 
rest on the same foundation, and may be subjected to 
the same conditions as other portions of the New Testa- 
ment. So far as they reveal they are inspired. So far 
as they are inspired they are infallible. Here, too, how- 
ever, the human element appears, as when Paul appends 
to a letter, evidently written under Divine inspiration, 
directions as to sending his cloak and parchments ; or, 
when he associates with authoritative advices regarding 
Church matters, the counsel to Timothy, ' Drink no 
longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's 
sake and thine often infirmities.' And not in these 
instances only. There is much in the Epistles of Paul 
that is obviously personal, such as expressions of regard 
for individuals, sometimes inserted on account of the 
writer and sometimes on behalf of others, which can in 

^ For further observations on the Gospels, see chap. vlL * The 
Canon.' 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 12-3 

no reasonable sense be regarded as inspired. It is quite 
otherwise, however, with his authoritative teaching. 
Here he stands before us as the faithful exponent of the 
Divine Spirit. The fact that a distinction is, in one 
instance at least, drawn by Paul himself between speak- 
ing by commandment and giving counsel, marks the 
conscientious integrity of the man, and stamps some 
other portions not thus separated with an authority 
which would not, under different circumstances, be so 
clear. 

Nor should the progressive character of the teaching 
of the N"ew Testament — harmonising as it does in this 
particular too with the Old — ^be unnoticed. Like its 
predecessor, it advances step by step as a communica- 
tion from God. Christ, who is its Alpha and Omega, 
not only claims to have received from the Father all 
He taught, He distinctly states that what He had thus 
received He communicated to His apostles. 'I have 
given unto them the words which Thou gavest unto 
Me.' 

No statement can be more explicit or more authorita 
tive ; for it at one and the same time extends and limits 
the Divine communication. 

It extends it to what the apostles should teach after 
their Lord's departure ; and in so doing it assures us that 
Ave may rely not only on what He taught them while in 
the flesh, but on what He communicated to them after 
He was risen and glorified. It is an endorsement^ so to 
speak, of that which was ultimately expanded and de- 
veloped by them in their epistles to the Churches; it is 
an authentication of that mysterious prediction which 
concludes the whole. 



124 LIBER LIBEOEirM. 

It limits Divine teaching to the men who received 
what they taught directly from the Lord. It does more ; 
it liinits them to the expansion of that teaching. Hence 
the substance of all they taught is involved in the words 
of Christ. ' All the great doctrinal features of the Epis- 
tles are found in germ in separate sayings of Christ. All 
the main outlines of the Apocalypse are given us in 
parables and sayings which trace the future history of 
His kingdom.' 

The New Testament thus becomes, like the Old, from 
first to last a progressive imity. But with this difference. 
' There progress is interrupted, often languid, and some- 
times so dubious as to seem like retrogression. Sere it 
is rapid and unbroken. From the manger of Bethlehem 
on earth, to the city of God coming down from heaven, 
the great scheme of things unrolls before us without a 
check, without a break.' 

The Apocalypse, however obscure at present, or how- 
ever much it may have been abused, is either Divinely 
iespired in the very highest sense, or, as an eminent 
sceptic has said, it is ' the most worthless book that was 
ever placed between covers.' But ' Wisdom is justified 
of her children.' ' I cannot doubt,' says the present 
Archbishop of Dublin, ' that a day will come when all 
the significance of the Apocalypse will be apparent, 
which hitherto it can scarcely be said to have been. 
When the great drama is hastening, with even briefer 
pauses, to its catastrophe; then, in one unlooked for 
way or another, the veil will be lifted from this won- 
drous Book, and it will be found strength in the fires, 
giving songs in the night, songs of joy and deliverance.' 

This prophecy, regarded as a prediction of what will 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 125 

surely one day come to pass, is, like the rest, hound up 
with what has gone before. ' The former Scriptures had 
revealed the Lord Jesus Christ as the Saviour not only 
of individual souls, but also of the "body," the Church. 
The Apocalypse deals with this Church as a whole^ and 
presents it as a society, in which man is perfected, and 
a kingdom, in which God is glorified. The sense of 
sharing in a corporate existence, and in a history and 
destinies larger than those which belong to us as indi- 
viduals, tends to throw the mind forward upon a course 
of things to come, through which this various history is 
to run and these glorious destinies to be reached. When 
present things in a measure disappoint us, we turn more 
eagerly to the brighter future. Who does not feel in 
reading the Epistles that some such sense of present 
disappointment grows upon him, and that such dark 
shadows are gathering on the scene, that a close like 
that of the Apocalypse seems to have been demanded ?' 
' This book,' it has been well said, 'teaches the doctrine 
of a blessed consummation ; of its cause, in the death of 
Christ ; of its history and of its nature ; of the coming 
and power of Him whom every eye shall see ; of His 
victory ; of the judgment of evil ; and of the great and 
final restoration of all things. Here all the hopes of 
humanity find at last their realisation — a perfect human- 
ity — ^perfect, not only individually, but perfect in society. 
It is the revelation of that which history leads us to 
despair of; it is the restoration not only of the personal 
but of the social life ; it is the creation not only of the 
man of God, but of the city of God. Here the revealed 
course of redemption culminates, and the history of man 
is closed ; and here, in these last chapters of the Bible, 



126 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

the unity of the whole Book is declared by the comple- 
tion of the design which has been developed in its pages, 
and by the disclosure of the result to which all preceding 
steps have tended.'^ 

While, however, the recognition of a human element 
even in the New Testament must be allowed, and may 
be so without compromising in any degree either the 
authority of Scripture or the reverence due to it as our 
guide through life, it is far otherwise with many modern 
speculations relating thereto. If, as we have been told, 
the Jewish element in the New Testament, that link 
which connects it with the past, and without which it 
would be isolated and unmeaning, is a delusion ; if we 
pretend, as some have done, \k\^ our Lord, when speak- 
ing of His ' kingdom,' was but manifesting the effect of 
Jewish culture, and was, so far, destitute of spiritual 
understanding; if we deny the supernatural, and affirm 
that the miracles were not real ; if we are absurd enough 
to imagine that the writers of the Gospels teach false- 
hood ' in all purity of intention ;' that they narrate as 
fact mere vague and floating traditions ; that they only 
tell us things ' as they conceived of them ;' that the 
words of the Bible, notwithstanding their falsity, may 
be regarded as true words, inasmuch as they express 
' the conceptions of the times, and the measure of knowl- 
edge or of faith to which every one of the writers had 
in his degree attained :' then we had far better abandon 
the Book at once ; for if this be its character, it matters 
little how soon it may fall into the neglect and contempt 
it so richly deserves. 

^ Bernard's Bampton Lectures on the Progress of Doctrine in the 
New Testament. 1864. 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 127 

Having thus — however rapidly and imperfectly — 
traced the unity which, amid diversity, distinguishes 
the various tracts of which the Bible is composed, let 
us now briefly notice the process by which these trea- 
tises were finally brought together and regarded as one 
book. 



CHAPTER VII. 

THE CANOK. 

The question of the Canon — or what is ' the schedule, 
so to speak, which contains the books of Scripture ' — ^is 
a very different one from that of the inspiration of the 
Bible. ' The object of the Canon,' says Dr. Chalmers, 
* is simply to ascertain what are the a<itual books which 
should be received into this collection of sacred writings. 
We may allow a book to be canonical, and yet maintain 
opinions of all sorts and varieties in regard to its inspi- 
ration.' It is important to keep this distinction in view. 
The history of the formation of the canon of Scripture 
is, without doubt, embarrassed by many difficulties. 
That of the Old Testament we accept from the Jews. 
When or how it was formed is doubtfal. Popular opin- 
ion assigned to Ezra and the great synagogue the task 
of collecting and promulgating the Scriptures, as part 
of their work in organising the Jewish Church. Doubts, 
however, have been thrown upon this belief. The 
authority is merely traditional, and a tradition which 
also regards Ezra as having ' rewritten the whole of the 
Old Testament from memory, the copies of which had 
perished by neglect.' Still it is but reasonable to sup- 
pose that the people on their return from exile would 
greatly desire an authoritative collection of their sacred 
books, and that such should then be formed is the more 



THE CANON. 129 

likely from the fact that the assistance of prophets could 
at this time be obtained, Haggai, Zechariah, and Mala- 
chi being cotemporary with Ezra and Nehemiah.^ 

'The history of the canon of the New Testament pre- 
sents a remarkable analogy to that of the Old. The 
beginnings of both are obscure from the circumstances 
under which they arose. Both grew silently under the 
guidance of an inward instinct, rather than by the force 
of external authority; both were connected with other 
religious literature by a series of books which claimed a 
partial and questionable authority ; both gained definite- 
ness in times of persecution.''^ In neither case is there 
any reason whatever to believe that the work was ac- 
complished under special Divine impulse or guidance. 
But neither the^ value nor the trustworthiness of the 
documents is lessened by the absence of inspired author- 
ity in their collection. 

Each book must be judged by what it contains. Most 
emphatically is this true of the Old Testament. As alike 
canonical, the book of Judges and the prophecies of 
Isaiah stand side by side, but it by no means thence 
follows that the contents of each are equally divine. 
The /brmer we accept simply on the authority of Jewish 
tradition, for of its composition we know nothing.^ The 
book evidently embraces an historical period of about 
350 years, and therefore, if not given by immediate 
revelation from heaven, which there is not the least rea- 
son to suppose^ it must have been compiled either from 
written documents or oral tradition, or from both. In 

^ See Kitto's Cyc, art. ' Ezra.' 

^ Art. 'Canon,' in Dr. Smith's Diet, of the Bible, by the Eev. B. F. 
Westcott. 

6* 



130 LIBER LIBROEUM. 

any case the possibiliti/ at least of legendary exaggera- 
tion in some of the narratives must be admitted ; unless 
indeed we assii7ne (for doing which we have no author- 
ity w^hatever) that God absolutely prevented any such 
admixture as inconsistent with the end for which the 
book was written, viz., to show that the Israelites 
brought upon themselves the calamities under which 
they suffered by their apostasy and idolatry. The latter 
(the prophecy of Isaiah) carries the evidence of its 
divinity in its own bosom, and is every way congruous 
with later revelations. 

No such diversity, however, belongs to the books of 
the ISTew Testament. The four Gospels are, with good 
reason, regarded as worthy of all acceptation, in the 
character of authentic and credible documents. But it 
is by no means easy to prove that they are so to the 
satisfaction of an indifferent observer. The originals, in 
all probability, perished at a very early period. No 
autograph of any one of them, so far as appears, was in 
existence when the canon of the New Testament was 
completed ; nor do we read of anyone who had ever seen 
them. Further, it can scarcely be disputed that, for 
many years, the Gospels were not generally known as 
the productions of the men whose names they bear. It 
was, without doubt, long before the written word occu- 
pied any position at all resembling that which it now 
holds. Nor is this surprising. For, as the Gospel had 
been at first proclaimed orally, a vivid tradition of this 
teaching would naturally take the place of any book or 
books in which it might be embodied. Indeed, for the 
first hundred and fifty years, the apostolic writings, 
although in separate circulation, do not seem to have 



THE CANON^. 131 

been regarded in any sense as forming one authoritative 
book. The first catalogue of the books of Holy Scrip- 
ture drawn up by any public body in the Christian 
Church, which has come down to us, is that of the Coun- 
cil of Laodicea (a. d. 365). The application of the term 
Bible to the collective volume of the sacred writings 
cannot be traced above the fourth century. Chrysostom 
adopts it in his second homily. He adds the word 
divine^ or,, as we should now express it, ' the Holy 
Bible." 

Yet it can scarcely be doubted that the genuineness 
of these narratives rests upon evidence better than that 
which establishes other ancient writings that are received 
without question. They were all composed during the 
first century ; and it is highly probable that they were 
all accepted as genuine before the close of the second. 
Irenaeus, who suffered martyrdom a. d. 202, affirms this 
to have been the case. The differences between the 
first three Gospels and the fourth seem to find a natural 
explanation in the fact that John, writing long after the 
others, purposely abstained from recording anew what 
was already known on the authority of his predecessors. 
Whether or no the first three Gospels were compiled 
from a common original, or whether, to some extent, the 
writers copied from each other, matters little; each 
Evangelist gives us his own personal testimony as far as 
it went ; and if they had alike access to documents sup- 
posed to be trustworthy, each, by the use he makes of 
them, gives us his own personal testimony to the accu- 
racy of such fragments. But all this is mere matter of 
conjecture, and in itself comparatively unimportant. 
^ Kitto's Cycl. of Bib. Lit., edited by Dr. Lindsay Alexander. 



132 LIBER LIBEORUM. 

Each gospel has its own features, though all conspire to 
produce an harmonious whole. 

The only important question is — How far may the 
Gospels, as we have them, be relied upon as truthful 
records ? and the answer must, to a great extent, turn 
upon the reception or rejection of the internal evidence 
they offer on their own behalf; much of course de- 
pending upon our willingness to admit the possibility of 
the supernatural, or our fixed determination, with or 
without reason, to beg the entire question by refusing 
to do other than relegate the miraculous to the domain 
of fiction. 

Let not this, however,, be regarded as closing the 
question ; for other evidence is not altogether wanting. 
The literary difficulties which, it is admitted, exist re- 
garding the Gospels, have no place in relation to some 
at least of St. Paul's Epistles. The genuineness and 
authenticity of the Epistle to the Romans, and of the 
two Epistles to the Corinthians, are not disputed ; and 
in them we have the most direct and unexceptional evi- 
dence to not a few of the statements given us in the 
Gospels. The Death of Christ and His Resurrection 
and Ascension, the writer asserts partly no doubt on the 
testimony of others, but chiefly from w^hat he believed 
to be a direct communication from the Lord. 

If Paul was not a deceiver — and that he was so 
nobody pretends — the great facts on which the New 
Testament turns are thoroughly endorsed by a man of 
the clearest intellect and of the highest character ; the 
most disinterested of witnesses ; the most richly endowed 
of all who have professed the Christian faith. Nobody 
can dispute — whatever may be deduced from the obser- 



THE CANON. 133 

vation — that the Christ of Paul and the Christ of the 
Gospels are, in all respects, the same ; that the miracles 
of the one correspond to the miracles of the other ; and 
that the teaching, whether ethical or doctrinal, is identi- 
cal in each. Add to this the consideration, already re- 
ferred to, which Paley places at the head of so many of 
his chapters, and it seems difficult to escape the conclu- 
sion that these occurrences could scarcely have been 
better attested.^ 

Yet all this, we are well aware, will go for very little 
with men in whom spiritual sensibility either slumbers 
or has never been awakened. There must be a corre- 
spondence of some kind between the giver and receiver 
of a testimony ; there must be a faculty in exercise for 
the reception of truth, answering in some degree to the 
truth presented, or no effect will be produced. If there 
is nothing loitkin a man which, being itself supernatural, 
witnesses to Divine revelation, it is impossible to pro- 
duce in such a mind any convictions relating thereto 
which are worth having. 

Two classes of persons commonly manifest a disposi- 
tion to take advantage, for the furtherance of their own 
designs, of admissions like those which we have felt 
compelled to make, viz. the literary sceptic, and the 
high churchman. The first — the sceptic — tells us that, 
on our own showing, he is justified in declining to place 
any confidence in the Gospels, since we allow that he 
can have no evidence that those now so called are true 
copies of the original autographs. He argues that, as 
there is not now extant any manuscript of earlier date 

^ This point has recently been well put by an able writer in the 
Saturday Review. 



134 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

than the fourth century, it is impossible to say how far 
interpolation, subtraction, or addition may have been 
carried. He affirms that, as we confess we have now 
no means of knowing by what precise rule the books 
supposed to be divinely inspired were distinguished 
from merely human compositions, the supposed authori- 
ty of the Gospels rests on precisely the same grounds as 
the infallibility of the pope- — that of popular tradition. 
Finally, he makes the most he can of sundry rash state- 
ments found in books ' on the evidences,' and so con- 
cludes that he has successfully defended his unbelief. 
The last — the high churchman — not only to a great 
extent endorses the sceptic in his conclusions, but mag- 
nifies, in every possible way, supposed difficulties, in 
order to prove thereby the necessity for Church au- 
thority. 

It is difficult to estimate the amount of mischief that 
has been done by good men who are bent upon showing 
that ' the history of the formation of the canon involves 
little less than the history of the building of the Catho- 
lic Church.' Mr. Westcott would not, we suppose, for 
a single moment place Paul and Ignatius on the same 
level, and yet he classes them together in telling us that 
' the letters of Ignatius complete the history of one fea- 
ture of Christianity ;' that 'the Epistle of St. Paul to the 
Ephesians, his pastoral epistles, and the epistles of Clem- 
ent and Ignatius, when taken together, mark an harmo- 
nious progression in the development of the idea of a 
Church.' He allows, indeed, that the productions of 
these fathers are ' writings of which no exact type can 
be found in the New Testament,' for ' they exhibit a 
spirit of order and organization foreign to the first stage 



THE CANON. 135 

of Christian society ;' but he does not see in this import- 
ant admission any reason for the rejection of the letters. 
Surely it must have occurred to him that since Ignatius 
was a cotemporary of Pliny the younger, a perusal of 
that eminent man's unquestioned letter to the Emperor 
Trajan would alone be suiScient to show how diiferent 
was the character of early Christianity from that which 
is presented in the so called Ignatian epistles. 

Dr. Irons, in his 'Bible and its Interpreters,' labours 
to overthrow all confidence in Scripture, except in so 
far as it is expounded by the Church, and read ' in the 
light of the creeds, the catechism, and the liturgy.' He 
regards a ' Book revelation ' as ' unreasonable in princi 
pie,' forgetting that everything to which man attaches 
importance he desires to have in writing; that all we 
know of history comes down to us in books ; that books 
live when tradition dies, and that letters remain un- 
changed when institutions have altogether lost their 
original character. And all this he does, simply that in 
the apparent worthlessness of all other evidence, the 
Church may lay claim to the absolute submission of 
men, and teach them to say in every difficulty — ' We 
know this to be so, because the Church has so told us; 
by her we prove all things, for she has authority in con- 
troversies of the faith.' 

Surely such writers might with advantage be reminded 
that blind submission to authority, instead of being faith, 
renders faith impossible, and that whenever such a claim 
is thoroughly understood, Hhe deep instinct of our spir 
itual being rises against it ; rises as a spiritual instinct 
of self-preservation against that entire disinheriting of 
us as God's offspring to which it amounts.'^ Might 
^ M'Leod Campbell: Thoughts on Revelation. 



136 LIBEK LIBROEUM. 

they not well consider whether the very attempt to 
throw men back upon the authority of ' fathers ' whose 
writings have themselves reached us in most questiona- 
ble shapes, and to make out that, if we accept the Gos- 
pels at all, it must be in reliance on the judgment or 
supposed semi-inspiration of turbulent assemblies of 
bishops, such as were those so graphically depicted by 
Dean Stanley in his lectures on the Eastern Church — 
men who but too often exhibited as much ignorance as 
credulity ; might they not, indeed, well consider whether 
the very attempt to do this is not to betray the cause of 
the Bible, in order to exalt the pretensions of the Church ? 

But it may be replied, Is not this after all the truth 
of the matter ? Is it not universally admitted that the 
councils of Laodicea and Carthage are our authorities 
for the New Testament canon? To a certain extent it 
undoubtedly is so ; but only in so far as these assemblies 
may be regarded trustworthy witnesses to the fact that, 
at a very early period, given documents were commonly 
received as genuine. The all-important inquiry is, not 
what the councils decided, but what reasons Christians 
had, in that day, for accepting certain books and reject- 
ing others. And the true answer will probably be found 
partly in traditions, which were then comparatively 
fresh ; and partly in that ' witness of the Spirit' to the 
truths embodied in the accepted books, which has been 
in all ages, and still is, the highest evidence to their 
canonicity. 

The apostle John, it is admitted, lived upwards of 
thirty years after the production of every apostolic 
writing, except his own apocalypse. It is surely, then, 
not unreasonable to suppose that he was in possession, 



THE CANON^. 137 

"before his death, of all inspired productions, or that he 
was instructed as to which of them were intended for 
the permanent guidance of the Church. We may natu- 
rally wonder that, under such circumstances, the apostle 
did not furnish for publication a formal and complete 
Hst of hooks which ought to be accepted ; but we can 
gather nothing from the omission to do so beyond this, 
that so far as we can see, it was not on the whole 
deemed desirable that the thing should be done. The 
acquisition of truth is, in all its stages and relations, 
probationary ; and no unimportant element in that pro- 
bation is the pains we take to collect evidence, and the 
mode in which we deal with it when obtained. 

Polycarp, who was a disciple of John, would, one 
would think, be sure to receive from his aged teachei 
such information as would enable him to decide w^hat 
writings then in circulation were or were not authorita- 
tive; and Irenseus, who heard Polycarp preach, would, 
in all probability, obtain from the martyr or from his 
immediate friends information so likely to be regulative 
of his teaching. From the time of Irenseus it is gene- 
rally admitted that the New Testament was composed 
'essentially of the same books as we receive at present, 
and that they were regarded with the same reverence 
as is now shown to them.' 

If this be true, and there is no reason to doubt its 
substantial accuracy, all that the councils would have 
to do would be to verify these things and to act upon 
them. This was done ; but in doing it, and in publish- 
ing a catalogue of the books then held to be inspired, 
these assemblies simply bore witness to the general 
belief of the existing churches that such, and such only, 



138 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

ought to be accepted. This is evident from the fact 
that some books were receiyed into the canon later than 
others, use and enquiry combining to give them in 
course of time their proper place. Beyond this the 
councils could do nothing ; for the men who there met 
could not personally know more about the matter than 
we do. Like Christians of the present day, they were 
not insensible to the internal evidence they found in 
favour of the books they accepted, or to their accord- 
ance with the instincts of the new nature. But in this 
particular they were but on a level with ourselves, as 
we again are, in this respect, on a level with those who 
spiritually lived on Scripture, long before its books were 
catalogued or any council had decided on the canon. 

Granting, then, as we readily may, that in the very 
earliest controversies about disputed readings, we have 
no evidence of any appeal having been made to apos- 
tolic originals ; granting that ' the full value of the 
Divine gift ' was not at first known, since ' in the first 
age the written word of the apostles occupied no 
authoritative position above their spoken word, or the 
vivid memory of their personal teaching;' admitting 
that pretended gospels were, at one time, almost count- 
less in number, we are stiil by no means driven either 
to renounce the authority of Scripture or to fall back 
upon the Church. 

It is easy to say. How can I accept the Gospels we 
have, unless I know the grounds on which they were 
accepted and other writings of a similar character 
rejected ? But it is not sensible to do so. We do not 
speak thus regarding such pretended gospels as are yet 
extant. Why do we not ourselves accept the so called 



THE CANON. 139 

' Apocryphal New Testament,' with its gospel of the 
infancy, its various epistles, its shepherd of Hermas, and 
such like productions ? Is any other reply needful than 
this — They condemn themselves ? No reasonable per- 
son imagines for a moment that any one of these 
writings can compete with those that are canonical. 
There is scarcely room for a doubt or a question either 
as to their authority or their value. Why may we not 
then suppose that this was precisely the case with the 
early churches ? These judges give no reasons for their 
decisions, simply because they never had a question 
regarding the claims of other documents which even 
admitted of serious discussion. The genuine Gospels 
carry their own evidence with them : they are seen to 
be Divine by their own light. But this, of course, im- 
plies that true Christians have, by virtue of their Chris- 
tianity, a gift of spiritual insight, in the light of which 
they can separate the true from the false. 

It is not surprising that many should be unprepared 
to admit this ; that they should demand objective evi- 
dence ; that they should be altogether unable to esti- 
mate the force of that which is purely subjective ; that 
having themselves never received anything which the 
Gospels reveal into their hearts^ they should refuse to 
do* more than stand outside, and coolly weigh what is to 
be said in favour of the authenticity and inspiration of 
Scripture in scales of their own making, and apart 
altogether from any considerations that are moral and 
spiritual. While this is the case, such persons must 
remain unsatisfied. The Bible always supposes the 
existence in the man to whom it speaks of a spiritual 
faculty having afiinity with its revelations; and this 
6* 



140 EIBER LIBRORUM. 

being the case, and ordained of God, it is vain to offer 
evidence in favour either of the miracles of the New 
Testament or of the authority of the Gospels to persons 
who are as yet quite unprepared to estimate that Divine 
love and condescension which underlies all. ' My sheep,' 
says Christ, ' know My voice,' Only in this way is it 
given to men, as Mr. Tennyson says, 

To feel, although no tongue can prove 
That every cloud that spreads above 
And veileth love, itself is love. 

To the man who accepts the Bible because he recog- 
nises in it the Divine voice, the human authorship 
becomes a matter of small importance. The Gospels 
would occupy precisely the same place in the estimation 
of such a man as they now do, whatever amount of 
doubt might be thrown on their literary composition. 
It is certainly pleasant to feel assured that the Epistle 
to the Romans, for instance, was written by Paul, but 
it would scarcely be less valued if, like the Epistle to 
the Hebrews, its authorship were uncertain. To say, 
therefore, that evidence of the authorship is essential to 
confidence in the books ; to affirm that if the Bible is not 
infallibly accurate in every particular, it does not differ 
from other writings ; to insist that it ought not to be 
received as a Divine revelation unless separate proof for 
the infallibility of each distinct portion can be present- 
ed ; to pretend that if an erroneous statement can be 
discoverep in any part of the volume the worthlessness 
of the whole is demonstrated : is simply to affirm that 
under no conditions whatever shall its authority be 
acknowledged; that any truth it may contain, if ac- 



m 
THE CANON. 141 

cepted at all, must be accepted only because it is capable 
of being proved true by other means ; that nothing is 
to be received as true merely because it is contained in 
the Bible„ 

Yet the Book lives. And in spite of the admission 
that authority, tradition, and literary evidence, all go, 
more or less, to form or to build up our faith in it, it 
remains true that, apart from all these things, learned 
and ignorant alike ' have hung over this Book as with 
a strange fascination, ever since it was known to be put 
together as a whole ;' some dreading it, as if it were an 
enemy, others loving it as the dearest and best of 
friends ; both not unfrequently being compelled to ex- 
claim, ' It tells me all things that ever I did. Is it not 
from God ?' This is, probably, what Coleridge means 
when he says, ' The Bible ^finds me in a way no other 
book does. I do not so much find it, as I am found 
of it.' 

How much more satisfactory, say some men, it is to 
rest our faith upon God than upon documents ! Doubt- 
less it is so ; but before such a dictum can be accepted, 
in the sense which these objectors put upon it, we must 
be informed where and how any true knowledge of God 
is to be obtained, if the documents in question are to 
be either rejected or ignored? Let us, therefore, in- 
stead of yielding to dissatisfaction with the mode in 
which God has been pleased to reveal Himself, now 
apply that which has been advanced to what are gen- 
erally regarded as difficulties in Scripture. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

DIFFICULTIES I:N^ THE BIBLE. 

Difficulties in Scripture are of various kinds ; some 
pertaining to the letter, and others to the spirit or sen- 
timent expressed or implied. Those in the Pentateuch 
which are supposed to involve statements that are un- 
scientific, or otherwise inaccurate, may surely be dis- 
posed of by considerations already advanced, viz., that 
Scripture \vas not written for the men of the nineteenth 
century alone, but for persons altogether unacquainted 
with our modern science; that some things recorded 
probably involve to a limited extent figures of speech ; 
that infallibility in regard to minor matters is nowhere 
claimed for the narratives in question. 

It is diflacult to see how any ofiScial record or nar- 
rative of well-known facts can be regarded as written 
under Divine inspiration, without lowering the term to 
an extent that altogether changes its signification; 
unless indeed it is intended to imply thereby that the 
writer has been miraculously preserved from error, and 
also been enabled to correct any mistakes he may find 
in the documents he copies, or from which he quotes. 
This is of course to assert that Jewish history, in all its 
most minute particulars is, so far as it is given in Scrip- 
ture, equivalent to a directly God-breathed communica- 
tion, for nothing else can be infallible. 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 143 

Those who hold to this view are, however, obliged 
to allow that the miracle they assert has not been pro- 
longed through the ages, by the supernatural preserva- 
tion of the Book thus composed from all the accidents 
to which written records, however carefully guarded, 
become in course of time liable. If the Book had been 
thus preserved, it is impossible that errors such as those 
already referred to^ could have been found in it. But 
if, as is evident, this has not been done ; if it was not 
needful, in order that the purposes of God should be 
accomplished, that a perpetual miracle should be wrought 
for the preservation of the document, it is hard to see 
that a miracle should have been either wrought or re- 
quired in order to enable honest and truth-loving men 
who lived in the fear of God, to write with adequate 
accuracy the well-known history of their people. All 
the probabilities, therefore, if we bear in mind the estab- 
lished fact that God never works a miracle needlessly^ 
are in favour of the supposition that no such miracle 
was wrought ; in which case errors, where they exist, 
must be attributed either to the original imperfection 
of the writers, or to the carelessness or dishonesty of 
later transcribers. 

Difficulties, however, remain which cannot thus be 
disposed of These arise— 

1. From the observation that certain transactions- 
attributed to judges or other distinguished parsonages — 
which everyone would now admit to be immoral, are, in 
Scripture, not only recorded without disapprobation, 
but sometimes, as in the cases of Deborah and David, 
made the subject of song and thanksgiving. The actions 
' Chap. ii. ' The Extent of the Claim,' pp. 18, 19. 



14:4 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

of Jael, of Raliab, of Ehud, and of Samson are of this 
character. 

2. That certain practices, such as the putting to death 
of the Cauaanites, slavery, and polygamy — the latter 
distinctly or implicitly condemned by Christ and His 
apostles — are both tolerated and legislated for ; while 
other laws, such as those relating to witchcraft, indicate 
nothing better than superstitious ignorance. 

3. That the phrases, ' Thus saith the Lord,' or ' The 
Lord said,' are sometimes used under circumstances that 
seem to involve the Divine Being in acts which stand in 
direct contradiction to His character as revealed to us 
in Christ. The hanging of Saul's seven sons before the 
Lord is a striking instance of this kind. 

4. That some of the supposed miracles of the Old 
Testament were wrought under circumstances which 
seem to be, so far as we are able to form any judgment 
on the subject, altogether unworthy of the Creator and 
so far out of harmony with other displays of supernatu- 
ral power. 

5. That, even in the New Testament, doctrines are by 
many supposed to be taught — such for instance as that 
of election and the eternal sensitive torment of unbe- 
lievers — which are inconsistent with declarations found 
elsewhere regarding God's love to His creatures and 
His pitifulness to their infirmities ; while other doctrines, 
like that of the Trinity, appear to contradict the Divine 
Unity. 

6. That the general unintelligibility of Scripture, 
which is manifested in incessant disputes and divisions 
as to what the Booh says^ forbids the belief that it is a 
message from God to man; since, if it had been, what- 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 145 

ever peculiarities might have distinguished it, the docu- 
ment itself would at least have been plain and unmis- 
takeable. 

' To each of these points it is essential that attention 
should be paid, if stumbling-blocks are to be removed 
out of the way of honest and enquiring minds. We take 
them up therefore in order ; and in so doing observe — 
1. That the treachery of Jael, the deceit of Rahab, 
the assassination of Eglon by Ehud, and the savagery 
of Samson, are simply recorded as historical facts. The 
song of Deborah by no means carries with it any evi- 
dence that what Jael did had the Divine approval. 
True, the poet who praises her was a prophetess, and 
one raised up to judge Israel in a time of peculiar de- 
pression ; but she was not on that account infallible 
either in her conduct or utterances. If Peter, the first 
of apostles, had to be withstood, because even in seek- 
ing to promote the faith of Christ he was to be blamed ; 
if John, in zeal for his Master's honour did, on one oc- 
casion at least, speak not knowing what spirit he was 
of, why should we fear to admit that Deborah, on this 
particular occasion, like David in some of his impreca- 
tory psalms, manifests patriotism rather than piety, and, 
carried away by natural enthusiasm, prophesies in a 
spirit which is not Divine ? ^ 

' Most people,' says an able writer,^ ' have felt some 
perplexity at the commendation which the author of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews bestows on such characters as 
those of Samson and Jephthah, of Gideon and of Barak. 
Certainly these men are not such as we should have 

^ See Yaughan's "Way to Kest, sect. iv. pp. 125, 126. 
' Art. on Dean Stanley's Jewish History, in Fraser's Magazine. 
1 



146 LIBER LIBRORTJM. 

expected to find held up as patterns, enrolled in such 
a band of faithful servants of God as Abraham, Isanc, 
Moses, and Samuel : it scarcely accords with our theo- 
ries of inspiration to read of the Spirit of the Lord 
descending upon such a one as Samson with his vices 
and his weaknesses, and prompting him to his wild acts 
of vengeance on his own false friends and his country's 
enemies ; arming Gideon for the punishment of Succotli 
and Peniel ; or Jephthah for the wholesale slaughter of 
the Ephraimites. Yet so speaks the sacred narrative, and 
the inspired commentator is not afraid to acknowledge 
these fierce patriots as lights of God's chosen people, as 
those who ^hy faith subdued kingdoms, obtained pro- 
mises, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies 
of the aliens.' It is/or their faith they are commended, 
and it may be truly said of them that the imperfection 
of their characters, the disorder of their times, set forth 
the more clearly the one redeeming element of trust in 
God that lurked in each of them, and through them 
kept alive the national existence. These deeds must 
surely be viewed by the light of their own times and 
their own race ; they must be judged according to their 
own code of morals, not by that which Christianity 
has rendered as it were elementary to us. Like other 
Orientals, they were profoundly indifferent as to the 
choice of means when they had succeeded in persuading 
themselves that the end to be obtained was the will of 
God.' 

Is it not possible, we may add, as Dean Stanley has 
suggested, that the book in which these strange things 
occur — that of the Judges — has been given to us ' with 
the express view of enforcing upon us the necessity 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 147 

which we are sometimes anxious to evade, of recog- 
nising the human, national, let us even add, barbarian 
element which plays its part in the sacred history ?' 

Those who hold that God directed the Judges in 
all that they did as rulers of the people, are of course 
driven to assume that Jehovah commanded, or dis- 
tinctly approved every one of the acts referred to, and 
then rightly arguing that no deed can be immoral 
which God justifies, they maintain all these acts to be 
right. This course would be very reverential and praise- 
worthy were it quite certain that what they assume 
is true. But what if it should not be ? Surely the 
strongest evidence ought to be forthcoming that God 
did actually command these things to be done, and that 
the book in which they are recorded was God-breathed, 
before we are required to admit that the Divine Being 
ever did or ever will command His children to do any- 
thing that He has Himself taught them to be wrong. 
Yet this is just the very evidence that is w?\nting. 

2. The difficulties supposed to arise out of the mas- 
sacre of the Canaanites and the permission of slavery 
have already been dealt with.^ It is not therefore ne- 
cessary to revert to them again. The permission of an 
evil like polygamy, under the circumstances then pre- 
vailing, is not so very difficult to account for, if it be 
recollected that in all His dealings with the children of 
Israel the Lord never disregarded the customs of the 
time in which His people lived, or ever set aside any 
surrounding influence which was not morally destructive 
to them. The laws given from time to time were not 
always ordained because they were abstractly the best, 
' See Correspondence, * Reply to the Doubter,' pp. 32, 33, 



148 LIBER LTBRORUM. 

bat as being the best they under the circumstances 
could l}ear. Some of them were avowedly temporary, 
and some — as the Sabbatic year for instance — appear to 
have been i-arely if ever carried out. In the wilderness, 
where but little flesh was eaten, they were forbidden 
to slay any animal for food except at the door of the 
Tabernacle (Levit. xvii. 1-7). In Palestine, or rather 
just before they entered it, this law was superseded by 
a distinct permission to kill and eat flesh anywhere 
(Deut. xii. 15-27). Polygamy and concubinage seem 
to have been allowed only to prevent greater evils, just 
as slavery, which existed universally, was, as we have 
seen, in the interests of humanity, modified in Israel to 
an extent unknown anywhere else. 

Of the sorcery and witchcraft referred to in various 
parts of Scripture we know little or nothing beyond 
the fact that its practice was a crime punishable by 
death. That^ however, as Mr. De Quincey has well 
observed, ' does not argue any Scriptural recognition of 
witchcraft as a possible ofience. An imaginary crime 
may imply a criminal intention that is not imaginary ; 
but also — which much more directly concerns the in- 
terests of a state — a criminal purpose that rests upon a 
mere delusion may work by means that are felonious 
for ends that are fatal. At this moment we, the 
English people, have laws, and severe ones, against 
witchcraft, viz. in the West Indies ; and indispensable 
it is that we should. The Obeah man from Africa can 
do no mischief to one of us ; the proud and enlightened 
white man despises his arts; and for A^m, therefore, 
these arts have no existence, for they work only through 
strong preconceptions of their reality, and through trem- 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 149 

bling faith in their efficacy. But by that very agency 
they are all-sufficient for the ruin of the poor credulous 
negro, and he has perished by a languishing decay 
thousands of times, under the knowledge that Ohi had 
been set for him. Justly, therefore, do our colonial 
courts punish the Obeah sorcerer, who, though an im- 
postor, is not the less a murderer.' 

'Now, the Hebrew witchcraft was probably even 
worse than this ; equally resting on delusions, it never- 
theless equally worked for unlawful ends, and it worked 
through idolatrous agencies, for all the spells, the rites, 
the invocations, were pagan. The witchcraft of Judea, 
therefore, must have kept up that connection with 
idolatry which it was the unceasing effort of the Hebrew 
polity to exterminate from the land.' ^ It must, how- 
ever, be admitted that there is a mystery about all the 
Satanic action referred to in the Bible, which we are as 
yet unable to solve. That a belief in sorcery prevailed 
among the Jews even in our Lord's time is evident from 
the Pharisees accusing Jesus of working His miracles 
by the power of Beelzebub ; and the very little we our- 
selves know about the invisible world, either of angels 
or demons, may well restrain us from hasty dogmatism 
on such a subject. 

The folly and sin of our forefathers in burning sup- 
posed witches consisted not in the mere persuasion 
— however destitute of reason — that sorcery was pos- 
sible^ but in their superstitious and selfish dread of evil 
powers ; their silly credulity ; and their atrocious cruelty 
towards those whom they ought to have pitied and 

^ De Quincoy's Miscellanies, vol. viii. 



150 LEBER LIBROKUM, 

assisted. In order to disbelieve in witchcraft, it is not 
necessary to become a Sadducee. 

3. The question whether all that is attributed to God 
in the Old Testament can confidently be asserted to 
have been done by Him, is one that will be answered in 
the affirmative or otherwise, according as we admit or 
refuse to admit the possibility of interpolation ; accord- 
ing to the interpretation we put upon the words ' Thus 
saith the Lord ;'^ according as we hold to, or abandon, 
the plenary inspiration, and consequent infallibility of 
every statement made in the Bible. It is surely, to say 
the least of it, very improbcMe that when Saul in his 
pride and rashness had on one occasion adjured the 
people, saying, 'Cursed be the man that eateth any food 
until the evening that I may be avenged on mine ene- 
mies,' the Lord should not only withhold an answer 
from the priest because Jonathan had ignorantly and 
therefore innocently disobeyed, but first signify by the 
lot that Jonathan should die for the sin, and then suffer 
the people, in indignant defiance of the decision, to res- 
cue him. Yet so it stands (1 Sam. xiv.), and, so stand- 
ing, all but proclaims aloud that in some part of the 
narrative there is error. 

It is, as we have already said, perhaps impossible for 
us to know how far a liability to mistake or to evade a 
Divine communication, whether given by voice or vision, 
was incurred by him who received it. But it may 
safely be asserted that all the probabilities are, that not 
only to the ancient prophet, but to everyone who re- 
ceived such intimations, a Divine message was always 
jwobationary ; and this in the sense that all action^ 
^ See Correspondence, ' Reply to the Doubter,* pp. 35-39. 



I 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 151 

whether on the mind or heart of man by the Spirit of 
God, is still probationary — that is to say, capable of 
being misunderstood, resisted, or absolutely rejected by 
a proud or rebellious spirit. Faith and humility must 
surely have found as much room for exercise the7i as 
they now do ; and if so, only by an unction from above 
was the Divine message or warning understood or re- 
garded. 

Further, it must be borne in mind, that among the 
Israelites, phrases implying a direct appeal to heaven 
were commonly used when no such communications 
really took place. Seeking an ordinary decision at law 
is in this way called enquiring of God, Mosqs says 
(Exod. xviii. 15), ^The people come unto me to enquire 
of God^ The following verse explains to us in what 
sense this phrase was used, for he adds, 'I judge be- 
tween one and another, and I do make them know the 
statutes of God and His laws.' Moses, as a wise legis- 
lator and administrator, was undoubtedly in these cases 
the representative of God; but to assume that because 
this was the case every separate decision of his was 
infallible, or that God, so to speak, was responsible for 
all His servant did, is surely but an extravagance. 

That Judea was governed theocratically, in a sense 
altogether peculiar and exceptional, cannot reasonably 
be doubted if Israelitish history be accepted as true. 
The heathen nations around them might, as they did, 
claim, like the Jew, to unite the secular and the reli- 
gious in their government ; they might boast, as they 
sometimes were accustomed to do, of the power of their 
gods, and of their intervention on their behalf; they 
might resort to omens and auguries as a means of agcer- 



k 



153 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

taining the will of superior divinities ; but to Judea 
alone belonged the reality of which all these things were 
but deceptive shadows. For them as a nation, and on 
behalf of their national interests, God did at times un- 
questionably interfere, although, strange as it must 
seem to us, the most marked interference seems often to 
have had little or no corresponding effect on the minds 
of the people. ' The great mass of them went about 
their daily occupations with probably neither more nor 
less reference to the Divine Being than the masses of 
the English people do at this day.' The more religious 
few were then, as they ever have been, whether among 
Jews or Gentiles, a small minority. 

Bearing in mind these conditions — liability to error 
arising from moral causes, on the part of the recipient, 
and the possibility of interpolation — we may, I think, 
safely and without irreverence^ deny the authority of all 
statements which assert that God ever did command 
any act which is obviously alien to His character as 
revealed in Christ; and, further, that this may be done 
without the slightest danger of thereby rejecting any 
portion of inspired Scripture. 

The sacrifice of Saul's seven sons (2 Sam. xxi. 8) cer- 
tainly appears to be so contrary to all that God has 
made known of Himself elsewhere, that it may well be 
questioned whether this portion of the narrative is not 
altogether an interpolation. The story, as it stands, 
asserts that a three years' famine having distressed the 
land, David enquired of the Lord in order to ascertain 
the reason of so terrible a punishment ; that the Lord 
answered him by stating that it was a judicial infliction 
on account of Saul having at some period or other of 



DIFFICULTIES 11^ THE BIBLE. 153 

his history, for we know not when, in his zeal for 
Israel, sought to slay the Gibeonites (Josh. ix. 3-27). 
In order to placate the Divine anger on account of 
this evil design on the part of the dead monarch, the 
seven sons of Saul are said to have been htmg up unto 
the Lord in Gibeah, after which God was entreated for 
the land. 

The question is, not so much whether this act, what- 
ever maybe its character, actually took place, as whether 
God did actually command or approve of it. ^ That it 
is utterly unlike everything else recorded of Jehovah 
is clear. Which course, then, is most reverent? To 
assume its truth, as divines generally do, and then con- 
fess our inability to judge of its rectitude — David having 
sworn to Saul that when he reached the kingdom he 
would not cut off his seed (1 Sam. xxiv. 20-22) — or to 
question whether it may not be an interpolation ? Of 
course we cannot prove that it is so ; but inasmuch as 
no one doubts that some few passages of the New Tes- 
tament have been thus wrongfully introduced, and there- 
fore form no part of Scripture, it is at least possible that 
such may have been the case with some portions of the Old. 

^ The Rev. David Jas. Yaughan, in a sermon on 'The Moral 
Difficulties of the Bible,' suggests, regarding this transaction, that 
David was probably deceived by the priest v^ho answered as from 
the Lord. ' It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew 
the Gibeonites.' That suspicion, he says, 'is increased when we 
remember that the priest, to whom David must have applied, would 
be that Abiathar, who alone had escaped from the bloody massacre 
of the priests at Nob, which Saul in a fit of brutal passion had com- 
manded, and who would be sure to entertain feelings of the deepest 
hatred, and a truly Oriental thirst for revenge against Saul and hia 
house.' 

•7* 



154 LIBER LIBROBTJM. 

That it is justifiable occasionaUy to resort to conjec- 
ture in Old Testament criticism can scarcely be denied. 
Dr. Davidson's remarks on this head are both moderate 
and judicious. ' The step is,' he says, 'sometimes un- 
avoidable. In consequence of the paucity and youth of 
all Hebrew manuscripts, the uncritical state in which 
the oldest and best versions are found, and the compara- 
tive poverty of external •evidence as a whole, added to 
the great extent of the Old Testament books, and the 
remote times from which they have been handed down, 
the necessity of applying critical conjecture in the case 
of the Old Testament becomes apparent. Yet it should 
be used sparingly. The only rule respecting its appli- 
cation is, when a pressing necessity arises let it be 
adopted.' And surely no necessity can be greater than 
that which presents itself when anything is attributed 
to God that is contrary to the revelation He has made 
of Himself in other parts of the written Word. Such is 
the case before us. 

Mr. Home, indeed, tells us, in the ' Critical Introduc- 
tion,' that the corruption of the Old Testament by the 
Jews was morally impossible^ But no assertion can be 
more extravagant. That it has been subjected to at 
least the same risks as the New Testament cannot be 
doubted, and if interpolation can be proved to have 
taken place in but a single instance in the one, it is by 
no means improbable that it may have been effected 
in the other. And this may be admitted without at 
all either denying or undervaluing the remarkable care 
which has been taken of the books as a whole, or their 
providential preservation by God. 

' Grit. Int., 3rd edition, vol. i. p. lit. 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 155 

'How often the separate books were transcribed, or 
with what degree of correctness, it is impossible to tell. 
We cannot suppose that the Old Testament writings 
were perfectly free from alterations in the earliest times. 
It is probable that they had been deteriorated even in 
the interval between their origin and the completion of 
the canon. All analogy confirms this supposition.' It 
is granted that * the Palestiniaif Jews were very scrupu- 
lous in guarding the text from innovation ; although it 
is impossible that they could have preserved it from all 
corruption.' It seems impossible to doubt that oppor- 
timities for interpolation would easily enough be found 
between the times of Ezra and the destruction of Jeru- 
salem, and it is matter for thankfulness that 'the oper i- 
tions of sacred criticism have proved that there is no 
material corruption in the Divine records ; that all 
doctrines and duties remain unaffected by its investiga- 
tions • and that during the lapse of so many centuries, 
the Holy Scriptures have been preserved in a surprising 
degree of purity.'^ 

The passage now under notice (2 Sam. xxi. 8) has 
ev^ery appearance of being interpolated for the purpose 
of justifying the more zealous adherents of David in 
having compassed the death of all claimants to his 
throne who were likely to be troublesome, a practice 
which then universally prevailed. Be this as it may, 
the transaction described is certainly out of harmony 
with other parts of Divine revelation, and the act, if it 
ever took place, was a direct violation of the oath by 
which David had pledged himself to Saul to preserve 
his children. The incident, as it stands, is quite un- 
* Kitto's Bib. Oycl. art. * Biblical Criticism.* 



156 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

connected with any other part of Scripture, and its with- 
drawal does not affect any fact or doctrine elsewhere 
stated. No one is bound to believe that, under the Old 
Testament dispensation, God either commanded or ap- 
proved any transaction the moral character of which 
cannot be defended. Treachery, falsehood, or the indul- 
gence of a revengeful spirit in any form, are not to be 
regarded as approved by God because they may be nar- 
rated without disapprobation by the historian. That 
they could be, would never have entered the mind of 
any man, but for the supposed necessity of sustaining 
the plenary inspiration of every part of the Bible. 

The extermination of theMidianites, which has already 
been noticed in connection with other remarks on the 
massacre of. the Canaanites,^ appears at first sight to 
have been marked by a peculiarly disgusting feature, 
the sparing of the female children and virgins, since it 
is commonly assumed by objectors that thes^ were 
reserved for prostitution. Very little reflection, how- 
ever, will suffice to show that this was not the case. 
* The law prohibited an Israelite even from marrying a 
captive without delays and previous formalities ; and if 
he afterwards divorced her, he was bound to set her at 
liberty because he had humbled her (Deut. xxi. 10-14). 
They were allowed to retain these Midianitish captives 
only as slaves, educating them, when they did their 
duty, in their families, and employing them as domestics, 
because being yet uncorrupted they could do so without 
moral danger. 

The conduct of David towards the Ammonites (2 
Sam. xii. 31) has been also represented as an act of 
^ See Correspondence, ' Reply to the Doubter,' p. 37. 



IFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 157 

diabolic cruelty, since he is said to have 'pat them 
under saws, and under harrows of iron, and under axes 
of iron, and made them pass through the brick-kihi.' 
This charge vanishes when it is seen that the Hebrew 
word translated 'under,' means also 'to.' The state- 
ment, properly rendered, is that he employed them as 
slaves in sawing wood, working harrows (or perhaps 
iron mines), and in making bricks. 

The slaughter of the Amalekites, on the supposition 
that it was commanded by God,^ has been said to justi- 
fy, or at least to furnish an apology for, religious perse- 
cution, since it seems to teach that the destruction by 
man of those who are regarded as the enemies of God, 
is pleasing in the Divine sight. But it really inculcates 
no such lesson ; for neither Moses nor Joshua, nor 
indeed any person mentioned with approbation in Scrip- 
ture, ever made war on any nation on this ground, 
beyon^d the borders of the promised land. They had 
no commission to overthrow idolatry by the sword ; no 
command to destroy idolaters as such out of their own 
land, and they never attempted to do it. The particular 
tribes inhabiting Palestine who refused to depart, and 
resisted in battle the armies of Israel, were indeed so 
dealt with, but not the heathen generally. On the con- 
trary, the prophets plead their cause along with that of 
the widow and the fatherless, and one of them at least 
looks forward with joy to the time when they shall be 
in all respects equal with Israel (Ezek. xlvii. 22). 
What, indeed, can be more touching than the declara- 
tion that the Lord loveth the stranger (the heathen) in 
giving him food and raiment? 'Love ye therefore,' 
^ See Correspondence, 'Reply to the Doubter,' pp. 38, 39.. 



158 LIBEK LIBEORUM. 

He says, 'the stranger: for ye were strangers in the 
land of Egypt' (Deut. x. 19). 

4. The fact that certain miracles are recorded in the 
Old Testament of a character not in harmony with the 
general principles that characterize the exercise of super- 
human power in other cases, again suggests the possibil- 
ity of interpolation. We say certain miracles, because, 
as a rule, the miraculous in the Old Testament is marked 
by precisely the same features as in the New. These 
features are benevolence, dignity, and congruity with 
all that is revealed of the character of God. There is 
nothing theatrical about them, no mere wonder-working, 
nothing aimless and objectless, , nothing monstrous or 
prodigious. In each and all of them we see ' the super- 
natural standing in relation to the Infinite,' and we are 
awed rather than startled as we gaze. But it can 
scarcely be said that this is true of all the miracles re- 
corded in Jewish history. There are exceptional cases, 
and in relation to these some doubt may well be enter- 
tained. 

As we have just observed, the direct interferences of 
God, whatever their object, whether visible or invisible, 
whether accomplished through the agency of the ele- 
ments, or by a power which left no sign, are all marked 
be a majesty and dignity which stamps them as Divine. 
For whatever we may say or think as to what would be 
really involved in the shadow going back on the sun- 
dial of Ahaz ; however ignorant we are as to whether 
the overthrow of the walls of Jericho was or was not 
occasioned by the agency of an earthquake ; whether or 
no the destruction of the Assyrian army was effected by 
means of a deadly simoom, or literally by an angel of 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 159 

God ; whether the speaking serpent in Eden was an 
actual animal or but the embodiment of Satan ; whether 
the voice of the ass rebuking Balaam was actual speech 
or only an utterance subjective to the prophet, matters 
little, so long as we recognise in these things the super- 
natural interference of the Creator, and regard them as 
equally supernatural with the appearance of the pillar 
of cloud and of fire, the descent of God on Mount Sinai, 
and the Resurrection of the Redeemer. 

Most of us have, no doubt, always thought of the 
passage of the Red Sea as having been effected calmly, 
the waters quietly parting as Moses waved the rod. 
Yet our faith is not endangered when we come to per- 
ceive that Dean Stanley is, in all probability, right, in 
supposing that it took place amid a hurricane of wind ; 
the sea roaring as it was driven back, and the darkness 
being lit up by streams of lightning. By taking this 
view, we come to understand better than we otherwise 
should the sublime words of David when he says, 'The 
waters saw Thee, O God, the waters saw Thee ; they 
were afraid : the depths also were troubled. The voice 
of Thy thunder was in the heaven : the lightnings light- 
ened the world: the earth trembled and shook. Thy 
way is in the sea, and Thy path in the great waters, 
and Thy footsteps are not known. Thou leddest thy 
people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron ' 
(Ps. Ixxvii. 18-20). 

The real difficulty connected with some of the mira- 
cles recorded in the Old Testament is not their sup- 
posed supernatural character, but the circumstances 
under which they are said to have been wrought. The 
lofty command of Joshua, uttered amid the excitement 



160 LIBER LIBEOETJM. 

of battle, and iii the sight of Israel, ' Sun stand thou 
still upon Gibeon ; and thou, Moon, in the valley of 
Ajalon,' followed as it is by the declaration that 'the 
sun stood still, and hasted not to go down about a ichole 
day^ is of this character, especially when the authority 
for the statement is said to be the Book of Jasher, of 
which we know nothing (Josh. x. 13). The difficulty 
is not in the unscientific character of the language, for 
that might be colloquial ; nor yet in any miraculous 
prolongation of light if God so willed it, but in the 
tone of the whole transaction. 

Again, certain miracles said to have been wrought by 
Elisha, such as the healing of the waters of Jericho, at 
the request of the men of the city^ so that dearth or 
barrenness should not be there any more (2 Kings ii. 
19-22) ; the cursing of those who mocked him, and the 
consequent destruction of forty-two young men (not 
' little children ') by two she-bears (2 Kings ii. 23-4) ; 
the making iron to swim in order that one of the sons 
of the prophets might secure a borrowed axe (2 Kings 
vi. 5) ; and the return to life of a man accidentally cast 
into the prophet's sepulchre when the corpse touched 
Elisha's bones (2 Kings xiii. 21), have all of them a very 
apocryphal appearance ; inasmuch as, in each instance, 
they are wrought for purposes which — reverently speak- 
ing and in the light of Scripture alone — seem to us to 
be unworthy of Divine interference. In one case the 
miracle seems to be wrought merely to meet the wishes 
of men apparently seeking only their own advantage ; 
in another to carry out what certainly looks like vin- 
dictive revenge for personal insult ; in a third, to save 
the cost of a small purchase; and in the last appa- 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 161 

rently for no object whatever beyond mere wonder- 
working. 

IN'ow, the question is, on what principle can these 
stories about Elisha be rejected, if the second book of 
Kings, in which they are found, is to be retained, and if 
other statements contained therein regarding the same 
prophet are to be believed ? The answer seems to be, 
Either by accepting the second book of Kings in its 
true character — that of an historical record, but sup- 
posing it to have been composed by men who were 
liable to accept floating traditions without sufficient 
discrimination — or that the work has been somewhat 
with at a later period. The latter seems to be far the 
more probable explanation. If any evidence can be 
produced to show that the second book of Kings was, 
as a matter of fact, written by men who were miracu- 
lously preserved from error, and further that no inter- 
polation can by possibility have taken place, then of 
course we are bound to accept all that is contained 
therein, and to believe that — account for it as we may 
— the great principles which dignify and sustain the 
miracles of our Lord and His apostles were not adhered 
to under the Old Testament dispensation. 

But surely we ought not to come to such a con- 
clusion either hastily or on insufficient grounds. The 
test^ be it remembered, by which these stories are to be 
tried is the Word of God itself not mere human opinion; 
the ground of rejection is precisely the same as that on 
which the story of Tobit and the fish, and of Bel and 
the Dragon were originally pronounced untrustworthy. 
Nothing, therefore, can be more unwarranted than the 
popular cry — too often encouraged by those who ought 



162 LIBER LIBROEUM. 

to know better — that any exercise of the verifying 
faculty in the present day must end in each man's 
accepting or rejecting just as much of Scripture as may 
suit him. 

Such an assertion is unwarrantable: (1) Because, as 
we have already said, the test applied is not human 
but Divine. (2) Because, being such, its application 
belongs only to those whose spirits have by Divine 
grace been more or less brought into harmony with the 
Divine Will. (3) Because it is the principle — almost 
the only ruling principle — on which any settlement of 
the canon has ever proceeded. At the very earliest 
period tradition no doubt had great weight, but as this 
weakened by lapse of time the spiritual discernment 
of the Churches became paramount. (4) Because it is, 
in all respects, more to be depended upon than any mere 
comparison of manuscripts would be, were they in 
existence. We say mere comparison, because the re- 
jection^ for instance, of the text known as 'the three 
heavenly witnesses,' while partially justified by its ab- 
sence from early manuscripts, is far more conclusively 
supported by its own character. On the other hand, 
the retention of the narrative of the woman taken in 
adultery, although wanting in so many copies, is not 
only justified by internal evidence, but also by the far 
greater probability that such a narrative should have 
been excluded, as dangerous, at a time when inflated 
and exaggerated notions about virginity were prevalent, 
than that it should have been interpolated under any 
circumstances whatever. 

In relation to the New Testament there is probably 
but one miracle that is fairly quesfionable — that of the 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 163 

supposed periodical descent of an angel into the pool of 
Bethesda. And this is rejected by believing critics on 
precisely the same grounds as those that have been 
stated — its want of congruity with other miracles, and 
its obvious improbability. It is incongruous, because a 
standing miracle of this sort, wrought, apart from any 
religious end, in a great city like Jerusalem, is alto- 
gether unlike anything else recorded. It is improbable, 
because Josephus, who would only have been too proud 
to boast of this mark of the Divine favour to the Jews, 
makes no mention of it. The view taken of the matter 
by many commentators is, that the angel referred to was 
a messenger from the temple who at stated seasons 
stirred up the blood receiyed there from the sacrifices, 
and that this was popularly supposed to possess healing 
virtues. 

The opinions of wise and good men, again, regarding 
demoniacs are various, and so long as they do not limit 
the power of God or explain away that which is written 
they are innocent. The darkness at the Crucifixion, 
objected to by Gibbon as asserting an eclipse which did 
not then take place, Guizot, following Origen, shows to 
be in all probability a preternatural darkness occasioned 
in the atmosphere. But all these varieties of opinion en- 
tertained by men who in common hold to the essential 
verity of Scripture as a Divine revelation, only go to 
show how frank and fearless has been the criticism to 
which the Book has been subjected, and how willing 
many Christians are in the strength of their faith to 
deal with it without any unfair reserve. 

5. The objection that doctrines are taught in the 
Bible which are inconsistent either with the justice or 



164: LEBER LIBRORUM. 

the love of God cannot be sustained. That such are 
frequently inferred from the sacred text is true enough ; 
but these conclusions belong to the interpretation of the 
Book by man, not to what it reveals as ftom God. It 
has certainly yet to be proved that any doctrine of elec- 
tion bearing on the world to come, is to be found in the 
Bible, that is different in principle from that which, as a 
fact of life, obtains in the providential government of 
God on earth, viz. the selection of some even before 
birth to rank and wealth, while others are introduced 
only to poverty and degradation. The end — however 
much it may be evaded or lost sight of on earth — being, 
in both worlds, that by this means all may be benefited, 
some by giving and some by receiving. The feio are 
favoured, only that by their loving self-sacrifice the 
many may be more favoured. That it is often not so 
now, is no evidence that it will not be so in 'the new 
earth wherein dwelleth righteousness!' 

The do2:ma of the Eternal sensitive sufferinsf of those 
who are unconverted here^ which has descended to us 
from the apostasy has, we firmly believe, no place in the 
Word of God ; it is, at the best, but a human and very 
inaccurate theological inference. 

Even on the doctrine of the Trinity — for the word 
itself is not Scriptural — much has been said and written 
which can find no sanction in the Bible. Scripture 
indeed bids us see in the Father, the Eternal Will 
creating and governing all things. Omnipotent, Omni- 
scient, and Omnipresent ; in the Word, God communi- 
cating with man, declaring the Divine Will to him and 
becoming incarnate for his redemption ; and in the 
Holy Spirit eternal life and love working out the 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 165 

Divine designs whether in creation or redemption ; but 
it tells lis also that these are Oxe. There it leaves us ; 
for the nature or mode of an eternal triplicity in the 
Divine nature is far beyond the comprehension of finite 
minds. Nor is it too much to say that the progress 
of truth has been greatly hindered by metaphysical dis- 
tinctions, often utterly unmeaning, regarding the Divine 
existence; as well as by expressions which, although 
embodying more or less that which is true, are in them- 
selves unauthorised. 

To apply to Christ such terms as ' Very God of very 
God, begotten not made ;' to speak of ' God the Son and 
God the Holy Ghost;' of 'three persons but one God,' 
and such like, however needful in scholastic controversy, 
or whatever amount of truth they may embody, cannot 
be justified by apostolic habits of thought and expres- 
sion. These phrases too often occasion the very evil 
they are intended to meet, and very frequently distress 
and perplex tender souls by creating difficulties which 
would otherwise never be felt. But ' fools rush in where 
angels fear to tread.' 

Dr. Irons seems to imagine that the absence from 
Scripture of such words as 'Trinity,' 'Holy Orders,' 
' Holy Sacrament,' ' Priest,' and such like, is fatal to 
those who regard the Bible as their only guide. ' What,' 
he says, ' is to become of all these to the man whose 
criticised Bible is his revelation?'^ Whether or no 
eternal punishment is taught m Scripture he admits has 
been made 'fairly debateable.'^ But one thought meets 
all difficulty. ' Him whom we ignorantly worship, the 
Church declares unto us by her creeds, her sacraments, 

^ The Bible and its Interpreters, p. 6'7. '"■ Ibid. pp. 94, 96. 



166 LIBER LIBEORTJM. 

and her hierarchy, and these things,' he holds, ' come 
into being qaite apait from St. Matthew's Gospel, or 
St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, or the Revelation of 
St. John.' So broad is the distinction between the Bible 
and Church authority; so needful is it to keep in mind 
that in defending the one we have nothing to do with 
any perplexities arising out of the other. 

6. The last ditBciilty to be looked at is the supposed 
umntelligibility of ScripturCj shown by the division of 
opinion to which it has given rise among those who 
study it diligently and earnestly. This is, by far, the 
most serious difficulty of all^ and would indeed be fatal 
to the pretensions of the book as containing a message 
from God to man, if it could also be shown that the 
cause of the divisions in question is to be found in the 
darkness of the document rather than in the prejudices 
and worldly interests of its expositors. But this cannot 
be done. No such diversity existed originally, and it 
exists now only as a result of that great and disastrous 
falling away which Paul foresaw and predicted (2 Thess. 
ii. 7). 

To imagine, as so many do, that Romanism, or 
Lutheranism, or Anglicanism, or any other particular 
form of organised Christianity, embodies in itself this 
evil thing is absurd. The * Mystery of Iniquity,' it is 
clear enough, worked in apostolic days, as it has worked 
ever since, viz. through the corruption of religion by 
its association with secular advantages. Whether these 
come in the shape of money, or of power, of popularity, 
or of status matters little. ' I know,' snys Paul to the 
elders of the Ephesians, ' that after my departing shall 
grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BTBLE. 167 

flock' (Acts XX. 29). Already, he says, there are many 
'who mdlce a traffic of the word^ for so Archbishop 
Trench translates the second of Corinthians (ii. 17). 
'Beware,' he writes to the Colossians, ^lest any man 
make booty of you^ through philosophy' — scientific and 
systematic theology so called (Col. ii. 8). 'Woe unto 
them,' exclaims Jude, for ' they have run greedily after 
the error of Balaam for reicard'* (v. 11). ^Withdraw 
thyself,' says Paul to Timothy, from men of corrupt 
minds who suppose that 'gain is godliness;' or rather^ 
according to Dr. Trench, that ' godliness is lucre — a 
means of getting gain' (1 Tim. vi. 5). 

Very startling indeed is it to find that at so early a 
period, and at a time when one would have thought 
that persecution and death were the only rewards that 
awaited the minister of Christ, the germ at least of 
coming greed and ambition should have been traceable. 
Yet so it was ; teaching ns at least this lesson, that no 
outward circumstances, however aj>parent]y favourable 
to purity, can altogether hinder designing men from 
usurping authority over conscience, or getting gain out 
of persons who are capable of being bribed by the 
promise of ease. 

But how, it will perhaps be said, does this fact, if it 
be one, account for the all but endless diversity of 
opinion which exists as to what the Bible really teaches? 
— for this is the point with which we have now to deal. 

The reply is obvious. Ecclesiastical bodies, whatever 
may be their character — whether ruling a state or ruled 
by it, whether established or voluntary, whether bond 
or free — cannot exist without, in one form or other, 
requiring adherence to church authority in matters of 



168 LIBEK LIBBORUM. 

faith. Some — as Episcopalians or Presbyterians — en- 
force by subscription that particular form of thought 
which is embodied in their articles or catechism. Some, 
like the Wesleyans, require a more general but not less 
stringent adherence to the writings of their great found- 
er. Others, as Independents or Baptists, cast anchor on 
Puritan ground. All, without exception, iix before- 
hand the great outline of belief, expressed or understood, 
which must be accepted before any man can share the 
privileges, or derive benefit from the emoluments which 
belong to the church or congregation in which he may 
desire to minister. As a rule^ the preacher is specially 
educated in and required to abide by the dogmas of the 
particular sect for whose service he is intended. Dif- 
ferences are in this way perpetuated. 

And here let us, once for all, decidedly protest against 
the line of argument we are pursuing being construed 
into an attack either on the creeds or the government of 
the Church of England, or regarded as an assault on any 
Church or body of ministers either in our own country 
or elsewhere. This is not the place to carry on such a 
warfare, were it either needful or desirable to do so. 
But it is not. We are answering the objections of the 
sceptic not to the Church but to the Bible ; and if, in 
doing so, we are compelled to separate the one from the 
other, and in the interests of truth obliged to put aside 
everything in the world, beyond the Book we have 
undertaken to defend, this, instead of being matter of 
complaint, should be cheerfully acquiesced in by those 
who profess to regard every other interest as unimport- 
ant when brought into comparison with that of the Word 
of God. 



DIFFICULTIES IN THE BIBLE. 169 

The Church and the Bible have not always needed 
separate defenders. It is granted by all parties — 'by 
the thoroughly evangelical Count de Gasparin, by the 
liberal Neander, and by the Roman Catholic Mohler' — 
that among the earliest disciples ' there was not the 
remotest desire to unravel the puzzles which afterwards 
beset the theological world. There is in their child-like 
faith an utter unconsciousness of them. With regard to 
outward forms the apostles verged towards indifference. 
They did not look on baptism as of great consequence ; 
and they regarded the observance of the eucharist as 
binding on them, because it was a memorial instituted 
by Him who was their life, and the object of intensest 
love. In the administration of their communities there 
ruled one great principle, viz., that each Christian man 
was a king and a priest — that by the indwelling of 
Christ's spirit within him he had become a free man in 
the highest sense of the word. The organization of 
churches under different office-bearers might proceed in 
various ways, provided this principle were untouched — 
and in fact the offices in the church, if they might be 
called offices, were not fixed, established modes of gov- 
ernment, but wise methods of bringing every gift of the 
church into active employment.' ^ If, therefore, it should 
seem to any that we have reflected on modern Churches, 
let it be borne in mind that we have done so unwillingly, 
and only to remove occasions of stumbling out of the 
way. 

Our only anxiety is that in considering difficulties in 
Scripture, men should not attribute to the Book that 

^ Donaldson's History of Christian Literature and Doctrine, vol. i. 
pp. 50-52. 

8 



170 LIBER LIBlJORUM. 

which really does not belong to it. Forgetfulness of 
this distinction has led a recent writer to maintain — 
surely without any good reason— that 'the doctrines 
w^hich the great mass of Christians Aa^e draicn from the 
Bible, for eighteen centuries, must either be what God 
meant them to draw, or else He did not inspire the 
Book. One thing or other, it is said, must hold — the 
old sense of the old words, or else the admission that 
they were not miraculously given by the Creator of the 
human mind for its instruction.' All this of course pro- 
ceeds on the supposition — ^favoured alike by believers and 
by sceptics — that one of the greatest historical facts in 
the world may be altogether ignored, viz., the existence 
and influence of a departure from the faith, which, work- 
ing unseen during the later portions of the apostolic age, 
rapidly developed after the decease of the last member 
of the sacred college into that ' mystery of iniquity ' 
which culminated in Rome, and which has ever since 
dominated over by far the largest portion of Christen- 
dom, flinging its shadow to this day, more or less, upon 
all of us. To the surprising transformation wrought in 
all lands by this undergrowth of error in the garden of 
the Lord, Dean Stanley has beautifully alluded in his 
introductory lecture on ' Ecclesiastical History.' 

It is, we are aware, commonly urged in extenuation 
of our religious diversities that the differences of Chris- 
tians as to doctrine are not so great as they seem ; that 
the confessions of the reformed of different countries 
are, after all, very similar ; that even Romanism main- 
tains a body of truth which is common to all true be- 
lievers ; and there are those, we doubt not, who will 
blame us for not having brought this fact forward as a 



DIFFICULTIES m THE BIBLE. 171 

sufficient answer to the objection of the sceptic. We 
cannot do so, because it does not satisfy our own mind. 
The various Churches of Christendom are, as a fact, 
united in opinion only so far as they have followed in 
common the theological systems of Augustine or of 
Anselm. The agreement, therefore, in question, so far 
as it goes, is hereditary and traditional only, and .not 
the result of that humble but independent investigation 
which is alone of value. That a common Christian life 
underlies all sorts of opinions is true enough, but this is 
not the point under consideration. 



CHAPTER IX. 

INTEEPRETATION OF SCEIPTURE. 

Whether it be possible to separate the defence of the 
Bible as a document from all considerations relative to 
the mode in which the Book should be interpreted, may 
be regarded as an open question. It is, however, not 
easy to see how such a separation can be absolute, so 
long as the view we take of the contents of Scripture 
more or less biases our decision as to the Divine char- 
acter of the record, or so long as our method of inter- 
preting that record depends, to some extent at least, on 
the opinion we form regarding its inspiration. 

If the whole Book be inspired in that plenary sense 
which excludes the possibility of error, interpretation, 
as Dr. Chalmers somewhere says, clearly resolves itself 
into mere questions of grammar. On the contrary, if 
the supernatural character of the revelation be denied, 
and the Book comes to be regarded simply as the expres- 
sion of the combined genius and piety of the writers, 
then its meaning will naturally be sought rather in the 
light of its supposed correspondence with the highest 
intuitions of the reader, than in any study of its gram- 
matical construction. Further, if it is viewed only or 
chiefly as a revelation of general principles, which are 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 173 

to be logically developed and arranged by divines 
according to the order of their importance, then syste- 
matic theology, or the interpretation of the Church 
springs into existence, and with it, in one form or other, 
the assumption of authority. 

The sense of uncertainty which, in the present day, 
has come over so many devout and believing minds as 
to the teaching of the Bible, is to be attributed partly, 
no doubt, to the different conclusions of systematic 
theologians, each system claiming to be sustained by 
Scripture, and, therefore, to be positively true ; partly 
to fanciful expositions founded on the notion that Scrip- 
ture is given us to he developed^ and that hidden mean- 
ings are in this way to be brought out of it ; and partly 
to a particular kind of textual preaching, originating, 
no doubt, in a somewhat superstitious view of verbal 
inspiration, which demands that we should dwell on 
every word of the text, as if the very syllables possessed 
something like a magic power of their own. Any book 
thus treated must necessarify soon be disencumbered 
of all definite meaning, and its teaching be placed at 
the mercy of its expositors. Such has in fact been the 
experience of the past.^ 

But while Divine revelation can have but one true 
meaning, nothing can be more certain than that, being 
a message from the Heavenly Father to His erring and 
sinful creatures, it must have a power of adaptation to 
each and all of them in particular, which, from the very 
nature of the case, forbids any exhaustive or authorita- 
tive interpretation of its contents. It has been truly 
said of Shakspeare that he was a ' myriad-minded ' man. 
^ See Appendix, Note B. * Biblical Interpretation.* 



174 LIBER LIBKORUM. 

How much more may it be said of the Bible, that it is 
a myriad-minded book. Perhaps it is not too much to 
affirm that, being intended to find affinity with every 
possible variety of thought and feeling ; to adapt itself 
to every man's separate idiosyncrasy ; to reveal to each 
just that particular phase or form of truth which is 
needful for him or her ; which can alone be made practi- 
cal and powerful for good to him or her; it is as impos- 
sible that it should have any one given and stereotyped 
expression, as that it should teach to every man one 
given and stereotyped lesson. 

Yet, let it never be forgotten that this peculiarity by 
no means interferes with the dejiniteness of the message, 
or in any way tends either to impair its explicitness, or 
to necessitate an authorized interpretation. For only 
as Scripture is allowed to adapt itself to the peculiar 
mental and moral condition of each individual, do its 
words become ' spirit and life ' to him, ruling his conduct 
and reigning in his affections. Instead, therefore, of 
finding an occasion of stumbling in the fact that diver- 
sities of view on many points, always have, and probably 
always will characterise Christians, we might rather 
discover in the wonderful adaptation of Divine teaching 
to each, evidence of the source from which it comes. 
For it is at once one, and yet diverse ; unchanging, and 
yet endowed with a capacity of all but infinite fitness 
to every variety of character. 

Just as material light, although the same to all, is yet 
different to persons of imperfect vision, suffering under 
diverse forms of disease ; so is spiritual illumination a 
different thing to men in different stages of the divine 
life, with varying intellectual powers, and, above all, 



INTEEPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 175 

with conflicting wills, passions, and interests ; and just 
as it would be impossible so to temper the light of the 
sun, that it should leave precisely the same impression 
on every optic nerve, whether sound or otherwise, so is 
it neither possible nor desirable that Divine truth should 
come home to the man who is jaundiced by his preju- 
dices, or drugged by his sins, precisely as it does to the 
simple and righteous soul who desires to know^ only 
that he may love and obey. 

ISTevertheless, to repeat what we have just said, we 
should greatly err if we argued from this peculiarity of 
revelation that it had no one definite and true meaning ; 
that it had more than one ; or that it ever was intended 
to be handled as a nucleus, around which ingenious 
illustration, varied reasoning, and imaginative eloquence 
might gather, for the delectation of a mixed crowd of 
auditors. Nor do we less mistake when we seize upon 
this or any other feature of Holy Scripture, either for 
the purpose of excusing our divisions, or as a reason for 
endeavoring after a false and deceptive unity, by requir- 
ing the acceptance of any given proposition, or series 
of propositions, deduced by the skill of man from the 
statements of the Book. There is no real unity on earth, 
whether in the natural or in the spiritual economy, 
which does not consist iii diversity. 

' Inspired teaching,' says Dr. Archer Butler, ' explain 
it as we may, appears comparatively indifferent to what 
seems to us so peculiarly important — close logical con- 
nection, and the intellectual symmetry of doctrines.' 
How much, he adds, 'is sometimes conveyed by assump- 
tions, such as inspiration alone can make without any 
violation of the canons of reasoning \—for with it alone 



176 LEBER LIBRORUM. 

assertion is argument.^ Had this truth been borne 
in mind we should have escaped many a discussion on 
fate and free will, and been content to know that while, 
as creatures, we are necessarily dependent on God for 
everything, we have yet free will enough to be capable, 
under Divine teaching, of voluntarily choosing the good 
and rejecting the evil ; that life and death, sin and grace, 
time and eternity, all bear on the grand result of this 
voluntary choice ; that as its accomplishment on earth, 
in spite of all hindrances, in the hearts of some is the 
present reward of the Redeemer's sufferings, its accom- 
plishment hereafter on the many will be the final triumph 
of Divine wisdom and love. 

Traditional interpretation denies this. It allows, in- 
deed, that, ' as by the disobedience of one man the many 
were made sinners, so, by the obedience of One shall 
the many be made righteous ;' that the world, though a 
fallen, is a redeemed world ; that Christ will eventually 
destroy the works of the devil; that good is destined, 
in the long run, to overcome evil; and that one day 
' every knee shall bow ' to Him who is ' King of kings, 
and Lord of lords.' But it does so only under many 
limitations. It is slow, if not unwilling, to admit even 
the restoration of those who have here lived and died 
without even hearing of a Saviour. It looks for a coun- 
terpoise to the losses of the past in the salvation of 
infants, and in the possible prolongation of a millennial 
period until the number of the saved shall exceed the 
number of the lost ; an arithmetical way of treating 
human happiness and misery which has in all ages found 
plenty of admirers, although anything less Godlike can 



IKTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 177 

scarcely be conceived. Divine revelation, however, is 
not responsible for this perversity. 

The Gospel, as Christ presents it, is, in one form or 
other, good news not to the few only but to all men 
without exception; to the heathen as well as to the 
Christian ; to the Jew in his impenitence ; to the profli- 
gate in his sin ; to the ignorant in his darkness ; and to 
the sceptic in his unbelief. Not a word intimates that 
its entire value hangs either on the knowledge or on the 
belief of it by those for whose benefit it was announced. 
It is a declaration of what God will do ; not of what He 
is willing to do if man permit. If it were not so, 
human nature being what it is, and the world what it 
always has been, the message would he^ to hy far the 
greater portion of nianMnd^ of no avail whatever ; the 
consolations it offers would be, to most persons, abso- 
lutely unreal, and the mission of Christ, instead of being 
a redeeming one, would involve little more than the 
ratification of a curse. 

Yet the Gospel is not alihe to all ; for it has a special 
object to accomplish as well as a general one. ' God, 
who is the Saviour of all men, is, we are distinctly told, 
specially the Saviour of them that believe' (1 Tim. 
iv. 10). 

The "iuode in which this double result will be accom- 
plished is not fully explained to us, but the declaration 
is not the less true on that account. Some things in 
Divine revelation are written as with a sunbeam ; other 
things are only hinted at. Yet who shall dare to say 
that the one is not as certain as the other ? As it is in 
Nature, so is it in Scripture : some things are proclaimed 

as from the mountain top ; other things are only whis- 

8* 



178 LIBER LrBROETJM. 

pered to the listening ear. The one arrests attention ; 
the other rewards it. Some tfiings are needful to be 
known for present guidance; other things are opened 
up as a recompense to those who desire to gain a full 
understanding of all the ways of God, so far as He may 
please to let us become acquainted with them. Yet all 
alike demand the scrutiny of the wise, and all alike 
reward the diligence of the industrious. 

That the Bible has a twofold purpose to accomplish 
in the world is evident from its character. If in one 
aspect it addresses^tself to man as man everywhere, in 
another it speaks 07ily to a particular class of men, viz., 
to those who, knowing the voice of the Redeemer, have 
received Him into their hearts, and believed on Him to 
the saving of their souls. To the one it announces, 
' Glad tidings of great joy, which shall be to all (the) 
people.' Its note is, ' On earth peace, good will toward 
men.' ^ To the other it says, ' Think not that I am come 
to send peace on earth. I came not to send peace but a 
sword.' ^ 

To the many it speaks not only of that silent abode 
where the slave shall be free from his master, where the 
wicked cease from troubling, and where the weary are 
at rest ; it points also to a world where ' there shall be 
neither sorrow nor any more pain.' ^ To thefeio it says, 
'All things are yours,' whether 'life or death,' whether 
' things present or things to come,' all are yours, for ye 
are Christ's, and Christ is God's.^ To both it reveals a 
day when reconciliation between God and man being 

^ Luke ii. 10-14. ' Rev. ixi. 4. 

2 Matt. X. 34. . * 1 Cor. iii. 21 and 22. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 179 

perfected there shall be ' new heavens and a new earth, 
wherein dwelleth righteousness.' ^ 

To all it proclaims a Father, little recognised, but not 
the less loving, who asks of every man the obedience 
and affection which is so sinfully withheld ; but to some 
it speaks of an ' earnest of the Spirit ' already possessed, 
and of a present heaven, enjoyed even on earth, although 
accompanied by many sorrows, and oftentimes by great 
tribulation. 

These, always said to be * a little flock,' and ' a pecu- 
liar people,' are spoken of as having received ' power or 
privilege to become the sons of God ' in a special sense ; 
they are ' born from above,' born ' not of blood nor ol 
the will of the flesh, but of God.' ^' Penitent and par- 
doned, they are declared to be even now ' heirs of God, 
and joint heirs with Christ ;' they are styled ' elect and 
chosen;' they are said to be 'predestinated from the 
foundation of the world, that they might be holy and 
without blame before God in love;' they are to * reign 
in life ;' t^ney are to be ' kings and priests to God and to 
Christ for ever and ever.' Nor should it be forgotten 
that it is to these that the fearful warnings which are by 
preachers generally applied to the ungodly are in the 
text really addressed. In all these cases the message is 
emphatically/ to a class. 

Broader distinctions than those referred to it is 
scarcely possible to lay down. Confusions more disas- 
trous than those which arise when these distinctions are 
disregarded can scarcely be imagined. Yet these con- 
fusions pervade Christian society, and are propagated 
with untiring zeal both from the pulpit and the press. 
' 2 Pet. ill. 13. '^ John i. 12, 13. 



180 LBBEB LIBEOEUM. 

The consequence is, that while some regard the offers 
of the Gospel as addressed only to the elect, and others 
look upon the glad tidings as finding adequate fulfilment 
in the general improvement of society, in advancing 
civilisation, and in material progress, most persons, 
blending the two, reduce the high demands made upon 
the Christian, as a man not of this worlds to the level 
of humanity in general, and regard them as imperative 
only so far as they are workable in ordinary Christian- 
ised society. 

The line drawn, however, in Scripture^ is a very sharp 
one and easily defined. On the one side of it stand not 
only nominal believers, but the vast multitudes who, in 
all past ages as now, have either never heard of Christ, 
or heard of Him only in connection with superstitions 
that have misled, assumptions that have disgusted, or 
sectarianisms that have repelled. On the other side of 
the line are to be found all^ by whatever name they may 
be known, who, having listened to the call to immediate 
repentance and faith, have been led by the grace of God 
earnestly to regard and honestly to obey it. 

To both these classes a day of judgment is announced ; 
a day when each shall receive according to what he has 
done in the body, whether it be good or bad, and there- 
fore to all essentially a judgment of works. But not in 
the same sense. Of the one we are told that they shall 
not come into condemnation with the world. To the 
faithful among them, though it be but in * few ' things, is 
to be committed ' many things.' Reward bestoived will 
be the recompense of their faith and steadfastness. Re- 
ward withheld will be the punishment of their negligence 
and sin. Of the other it is said that they shall be judged 



INTEKPRETATION OF SCRIPTrKE. 181 

every man according to his opportunities and actual 
doings, some being beaten with ' few stripes,' and some 
with ' many stripes.' 

Of the finally reprobate we will not here speak. It 
may he that there are men so depraved that they cannot 
be saved from themselves and from their sins, without 
the application of forces which are inconsistent with the 
retention of that amount of moral freedom, apart from 
which what we call character cannot exist — 2i possibility 
which duly pondered may perhaps throw light on the 
* lake of fire ' and 'the second death.' 

Such, as it appears to us, is the teaching of Scripture, 
when regarded without reference to the dogmas of 
Churches or of sects ; and if, as we stated at the begin- 
ning of this chapter, the view we take oi the contents of 
the Bible more or less biases our decision as to the 
Divine character of the record, it is not too much to ask 
that the aspect of it now presented may be weighed 
before it is rejected. 

Corresponding to the twofold message we have indi- 
cated is the twofold form in which, as a fact, the Gospel 
is constantly bearing upon mankind : viz., as an influ- 
ence in society^ alleviating human sorrow, modifying 
institutions, quickening benevolence, and generally ele- 
vating public sentiment, and as a power from above^ 
transforming the individual believer, delivering him 
from the dominion of evil, and making him to feel that, 
like his Lord, he is but a pilgrim and a stranger here. 

Recognised or unrecognised, these two forms of action 
are constantly going on, sometimes separately embodied 
with more or less distinctness in regularly organised 
institutions, and sometimes blending in Churches of 



182 LIBKE LIBEORUM. 

various forms and character. TJie one^ which has been 
called that of multitudinism, would seem naturally to 
belong to national establishments of religion ; the other ^ 
that of individualism, as naturally to nonconformity. 
Nor can it be doubted that if each of these classes {as 
religious men — for we have here nothing to do with any 
man's duty as a citizen) was to pursue its own calling of 
God, regardless of everything else — if each could carry 
out the distinctive principle it embodies without rivalry, 
the measure of truth thus separately conserved would 
be brought to bear upon the world with far more force 
than it can be amid the strifes and ambitions which now 
so frequently characterise both parties. If each has 
indeed a religious idea to embody, each will of course 
find its strength in the extent to which it realizes that 
particular end to which its principles point. Rivalry, 
leading to imitation, as it now so often does, can never 
be of any real service to either, and still les» to the 
world at large.* 

Rightly ordered, the one might teach us our obliga- 
tions as a Christian people ; the other, our privileges as 
the children of God. The former, fulfilling the mission 
of the Baptist, would call every man to repentance. 
The latter, recognizing growth, would teach the sacred- 
ness of religious convictions, and hold up individuality 
as the law of the spiritual life. The first, whether work- 
ing through creeds and confessions, by the press or by 
the pulpit, by authority or by oratorical appeal, would 
seek to awaken, to rouse, and to guide. The last, recog- 
nising the fact that he who has become Christ's has, by 

' See Appendix, Note C. 'National Establishments.' 



IKTEKPRETATION" OF SCRIPTUKE. 183 

that affiance, been forever taken out of the hand of man, 
would seek to cherish the spiritual independence of the 
renewed soul, and teach that to no higher elevation can 
any* man reach than to that which he rises when he 
becomes the scholar of God. 

There may, however, still be those who fail to see that 
any particular interpretation of Scripture, whatever may 
be its merits or demerits, can have very much to do with 
the acceptance or rejection of the Book supposed to be 
thus read or misread. The question, therefore, must be 
dealt with as one of fact. Such persons must be content 
to believe on testimony, whatever their own experience 
may be, that in many cases interpretation has a great 
deal to do with the acceptance or rejection of the docu- 
ment. The letter which has been prefixed to this volume 
may be regarded as a witness. For there^ as among men 
generally, the Bible is clearly held responsible for dog- 
mas which it does not teach, the Gospel being not un- 
frequently rejected because, among other things, it is 
supposed to consign all but a mere fraction of the human 
race to eternal wickedness and misery. 

That such is 7iot the fact can of course only be proved 
by an appeal from man to God — from the commentary 
to the text — from the traditions of the Church to the true 
sayings of the Holy Ghost ; but this, of course, involves 
interpretation. Other evidence might be adduced, if it 
were needful, to show that the connection between pre- 
vailing unbelief and ordinary orthodox theology is not 
an imaginary one. The late Mr. Isaac Taylor, than 
whom no one has a better right to speak on this subject, 
has distinctly avowed his conviction that the only effec- 
tual remedy for modern scepticism is to be found ' in 



184 LIBER LIBKORUM. 

AIT INTELLIGIBLE AND DEFENSIBLE PRINCIPLE OF BlBLI- 

CAL Interpretation.' 

' Until this is obtained,' he says, ' Christianity will be 
found powerless against infidelity.' Those who have 
watched the current of public opinion carefully and 
closely, know well — much as they may dislike the con- 
clusion or shrink from the avowal of it — that ' the grow- 
ing feeling that prevails, amid all the splendours of 
advancing science, that this is but the night-time of the 
soul,' can only be relieved by ' a thorough and absolute 
deliverance of the Bible from the trammels that have 
been imposed upon it by polemical theology.' ^ 

^ The Restoration of Belief. 



CHAPTER X. 



THE MODERN PHARISEE, 



By the * Pharisee ' is here meant the man who— like his 
prototype of old — first attaches a superstitious impor- 
tance to the letter of Scripture, and then adds to it a 
crowd of theological inferences, sometimes based on the 
authority of * fathers,' and sometimes developed on prin- 
ciples of interpretation which permit the expositor to 
tread in the footsteps of those Jewish rabbis who made 
mountains of meaning to hang on the plainest statements. 
Pharisees — whatever may be their personal excellence 
— are, in relation to the Bible, mainly ruled by old pre- 
judices ; they delight in whatever is Jixed^ whether by 
authority or by the common opinion of Christians. They 
insist that reverence for the past is commanded in Scrip- 
ture, since we are told to 'ask for the old paths;' that 
submission to the opinions of the good is enforced^ since 
we are bidden to follow ' the footsteps of the flock.' The 
connection in which these passag^es may stand is with 
such persons a matter of very little moment. To ques- 
tion their applicability is but to indicate the unhallowed 
consequences which flow from the exercise of private 
judgment. To such men the plenary inspiration of the 
Bible is the first article^ if not the foundation of their 



186 LIBER LIBRORITM. 

faith. With most of them the authority of the Church 
to expound the volume is the complement of their behef. 

That this idea, however expressed or embodied, car- 
ries with it not only the denial to revelation of its self- 
evidencing nature, as light coming from God to man, 
but also a casting away of the birthright of the Christian 
as a child of the light, never seems to enter the minds 
of these good men. They wonder that so many, whom 
they cannot but regard as true followers of the Re- 
deemer, should revolt against this ' disinheriting ' pro- 
cess. They cannot see that blind submission to autho- 
rity, instead of being identical with faith and humility, 
is a very different thing from either the one or the other. 
They forget that the filial spirit is to trust the Father^ 
not the stranger or even the brother. They forget that 
to be childlike is not to be childish, and that Rome has 
taught us there is no limit to the surrender that will be 
demanded if once we yield to any man the right of dis- 
cerning for us what is true and what is false. 

Let us, however, inquire what can be said for the 
theory — since it is nothing more — that the Bible from 
Genesis to Revelation is inspired and infallible. 

The latest, and in some respects the most elaborate, 
defence of the infallibility of the Bible as a hook will pro- 
bably be found in a volume of sermons by Mr. Burgon, 
preached before the University of Oxford soon after the 
publication of ' Essays and Reviews.' In reading that 
work, as well as various other publications taking similar 
ground, one is certainly startled to find not how much, 
but how very little, can be advanced in favour either of 
the verbal or plenary inspiration of Scripture. Every- 
thing important in the enquiry seems to be assumed. 



THE MODERN PHAKISEE. 187 

The ground taken is, *The verbal inspiration of the 
Bible is an axiom, a first truth from which all others 
start.' The conclusions of those who advocate this 
theory do not, of course, embrace either the denial of 
various readings or the imperfections of translations, but 
it is difficult to see how the admission of the one or the 
performance of the other can be consistent with the 
theory so much valued. 

The form in which these views are commonly put is 
something like this: Our Lord has said, 'the Scripture 
cannot be broken' (explained away — so Alford on 
John X. 35), therefore everything in the volume called 
by us the Bible is inspired and 'infallible.' Or thus: 
' prophets and apostles claim, and justly, to deliver 
God- breathed messages; therefore historians, whether 
narrators of what they had seen or copyists from public 
records, must necessarily possess the same Divine gift.' 
Or again : Jesus prayed for His apostles, saying, ' sanc- 
tify them by Thy truth. Thy word is truth ;' therefore 
everything regarded as Scripture in our Lord's time is 
God's revealed truth. That the Septuagint thea con- 
tained portions of the Apocrypha they do not think it 
worth while to notice. That is one course of reasoning. 

A second is this : ' If the authorship of each book is 
not accurately stated, the truthfulness %f its contents 
departs.' Mr. Burgon says, ' If the son of Nun did not 
write the book which goes under his name, then the 
narrative is not authentic' If any distinction be drawn 
between the inspired and the uninspired in Scripture, 
then everything belonging to the latter category must 
be cast out. That which is stated may be perfectly 
true ; the man who records it may have been an ear or 



188 LIBER LIBROEUM. 

an eye witness of what he tells us ; nevertheless, if he 
has not been inspired in such a sense as to render any 
inaccuracy impossible, his words are worthless. ' We 
refuse,' Mr. Bnrgon goes on to say, ' to retain a single 
passage which is not (in the highest sense) the Word of 
God.' Not only must the message itself be inspired and 
infallible, every accessory to it must, in the same way, 
be inspired also. Refusing to allow that a given 
thought may be both truthfully and accurately ex- 
pressed in varying words, he says, ' as for thoughts 
being inspired without the words, you may as well talk 
of a tune without notes or a sum without figures.' 

These extravagancies, for such we cannot but think 
them, are supposed to find support in reasonings like 
these. ' Admit the slightest difference as to the infalli- 
bility of different portions of the Bible and you make 
every man a judge as to what he will receive and what 
he will reject.' Such a man must ' take a pen and cross 
out every word he imagines to be uninspired, in which 
case how can we know that he does not cross out texts 
on which we rest our hopes ?' Such is the second line 
of argument. 

But there is a third which amounts to this : ' Christ and 
His apostles quoted from the Old Testament, therefore 
every part of the Book from which they quoted is cer- 
tainly inspired.' Further, where Christ and His apostles 
apply Scripture, the text thus used must originally have 
had hidden within it the particular truth it is used to 
illustrate ; e. g. ' If Deuteronomy xxv. 4 has no re- 
ference to the Christian ministry, then the entire context 
in two of St. Paul's Epistles (1 Corinthians ix. 9 ; 1 Ti- 
mothy V. 18) must go at once.' Further still: if Paul 



THE MODERN PHARISEE. 189 

shows, as he does, that certain Scriptures may be applied 
allegorically, all Scripture must have a depth of meaning 
far beyond that which appears ; in consequence, all of it 
is inspired, and it is our duty to bring out hidden mean- 
ings from everything, whatever may be the end for 
which it was primarily given. ' Even mere catalogues 
of names,' insists Mr. Burgon, ' are full of edification, 
the driest details full of God. The list of the dukes of 
Edom is as much inspired, and in the same sense, as 
every other part.' ^ This is the third line of reasoning. 

It is always difficult to state the views of an oppo- 
nent in what he would consider a fair and full manner, 
and it is quite possible that this has not been accom- 
plished in the present instance. But if it be so, the 
defect is unintentional. 

Easy is it to understand how all this inconclusive dis- 
course about inspiration may be to many pious persons 
wonderfully attractive. They will say it is such a 
simple view, so straightforward and reverential, so 
humbling to man's reason, so needful for his guidance, 
that to reject it is as dishonouring to God as it is indi- 
cative of human pride. Whether it be a true view or 
not seems scarcely worthy of consideration. To doubt 
on such a matter is to sin. 

The answer to such declamation is, however, obvious. 
The view in question is a "tnere theory^ and certainly not 
the less so because the persons who hold it are continu- 
ually telling us they have no theory of inspiration — they 
believe in it, and that is enough. The question is, why 

* Gaussen says of the entire Bible : ' In its miraculous pages every 
verse and word, without exception, even to a particle apparently the 
most indifferent, must have been given of God.' 



190 LIBER LEBRORUM. 

do they believe in what is called the verbal inspiration 
of Scripture ? That the Word of God is embodied in 
the Bible is here, at least, not disputed ; that, as they put 
it, ' to impute blunders to the Holy Ghost is an impiety,' 
cannot, surely, be denied ; that ' to bow before a Divine 
statement without question becomes us as creatures far 
better than stumbling at it,' every Christian must allow ; 
but does it thence follow that everything found within 
the volume which contains God's word is as sacred and 
as infallible as that word itself? This is the real point 
in question. 

Many think otherwise ; they cannot bring themselves 
to believe that it is either safe or reverent to assume 
without adequate evidence that anything is properly 
speaking Divine which is contrary to what is elsewhere 
revealed of God, anything which, when examined and 
tested by the light Christ has given us, is incapable of 
defence. Well may such persons ask, ' Is it right to stake 
the truthfulness of the Bible on the accuracy or other- 
wise of the account we have of its authorship, or, indeed, 
on any literary question whatever? Is it either wise or 
just to affirm that the exact substance of a statement, the 
real purport of what may have been spoken, is not for 
all practical purposes the same thing as the very words 
which were actually uttered ?' Too much is at issue to 
\\ J render these enquiries other than of vital importance. 

The question of hidden meanings is a more delicate 
one to deal with, for if we must of necessity hold that 
every text (those quoted by the Evangelist Matthew, 
for instance) had in it originally the signification which 
is there by accommodation implied ; if the writer, brings 
each several passage from the Old Testament before us, 






THE MODERiq' PHARISEE. 191 

not as an illustration, refulfilment, or reapplication of 
what had occurred long before, 7iot as an accommodation 
in any sense, but simply as a development ; if we are to 
believe that the beautiful image of Rachel weeping for 
her children was intended by him who first used it as a 
mystic prophecy of the massacre at Bethlehem ; if the 
words of Hosea, ' Out of Egypt have I called my son,' 
embody a distinct prophecy of the flight of Joseph: 
then it may readily be granted the Bible assumes a 
character which obliges us to admit our utter incapacity 
to understand even its plainest narratives. 

Further, if we are bound to interpret the Old Testa- 
ment generally^ as St. Paul in some ca^^5 interprets it; 
if we are to find in every historical personage a type of 
Christ ; if we are to say of each great event that is 
recorded, ^ which thing is an allegory,' and to expound 
accordingly : then^ undoubtedly, we must regard every 
part of the Bible without exception as inspired, infal- 
lible, and alas! it must be added, unintelligible. ITo- 
thing can be plainer than that, if this be the case, no 
uninspired man is capable of interpreting the Bible; for 
who would consent to be, in this respect, at the mercy 
of one who, for aught we can tell, may be fanciful, in- 
genious, or weak ? Under such methods Mr. Jowett is 
right in saying, ' we may shut our lexicons and draw 
lots for the sense.' The Jewish rabbis, by following 
such a course without the qualification required — infal- 
lible guidance — made, as our Lord Himself tells us, 'the 
word of God of none effect.' One of them, it is said, 
actually professed to teach thirteen different methods of 
expounding the plainest declarations. Short of inspira- 
tion, it is obviously impossible that any man should be 



192 LIBEB LIBROEUM. 

qualified to interpret Scripture if he is to develop what 
he assumes to be truth out of the Book, instead of being 
content to accept what \ie finds there. 

The only answer to all this is the Church. God, 
we are told, has provided for all difficulty by giving to 
His Church — whether represented by popes or councils, 
by fathers or by common consent, matters not — poicer 
and authority to settle all disputed points, and to declare 
to the people the true meaning of the written Word. 

Mr. Burgon soon finds himself obliged to fall back 
upon this doctrine. 'God,' he says, 'vouchsafes to His 
Church effectual guidance. Want of faith in the Church 
(by which he understands the Church of England) and 
her ordinances is the first step in a soul's downward 
progress.' To imagine oneself a disciple of Christ or 
Paul, and so to disengage oneself from the history of 
Christendom and the after-thoughts of theology is, he 
thinks, ' inordinate conceit.' The creeds, he assures us, 
are older than Scripture. The doctrines of the Church 
were not found in Scripture ; they existed before it, and 
are only proved by it. He speaks of these creeds as 
' coeval with Christianity itself,' and as bearing ' a 
solemn independent testimony from the very birthday 
of Christianity.' He thinks it monstrous to suppose 
that a man is either at liberty or able to gather his own 
religion for himself out of the Bible. Nor are we, in 
England, he says, thus left. 'The book of Common 
Prayer is a sufficient safeguard.' 

Nor is he alone in this view. Another distinguished 
man, although certainly of a very different school — Dr. 
Rowland Williams — tells us that the Church is 'an 
inspired society ;' that ' the Prayer Book is constructed 



THE MODERN PHARISEE. 193 

on this idea ;' and that the Bible, hke the liturgy, is 

* the written voice of the congregation.' So strangely 
do extremes sometimes meet. 

It may not be miadvisable here to separate the germ 
of truth which is found in these observations from the 
mass of error by which it is surrounded. No one dis- 
putes that the Church (that is, a company of living 
believers in Christ) was called into existence by the 
Lord and His Apostles before the Kew Testament was 
written ; but it owes this existence to the word which 
the Scriptures contain, ' The word was antecedent to 
the existence of the Church, as the cause is to the effect. 
The writing of that Word, and its reception when 
written, were subsequent to the formation of the Church 
(the Christian congregation of believers), but the writ- 
ing only made permanent for future time the Word by 
which the Church had been created ; and the reception 
of the writings only recognised them as the same Word 
in its form of permanence. Thus, while the Church is 
chronologically before the Bible, the Bible \% potentially 
before the Church ; since the written Word, which is 
the ground of faith to later generations, is one in origin, 
authority, and substance with the oral Word, which 
was the ground of faith to the first generation of Chris- 
tians.' ^ 

• Of course, neither these facts nor any reasoning 
founded thereon, will have weight with persons, and 
they are many, who are determined, at all hazards, to 
uphold ecclesiastical authority ; still less with those 
who tell us that the theological theories and peculiar 
views of Paul and John — although worthy of respect 

^ Bernard's Bampton Lectures. 



194 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

because worked out with mucli painful thought — are in 
no respects revelation^ or at all binding upon others. 
For here again extremes meet. The Sceptic^ classing 
apostolic developments with those of a later age, neces- 
sarily plays Into the hands of those who maintain a 
continual inspiration in the Church, and in so doing, 
whatever he may intend, practically supports its claim 
to an authority which, if not absolute, is paramount to 
every other. Some Churchmen on the other hand, it 
may be feared, by the arrogance they often manifest, 
as well as by the unreasonableness of the pretensions 
they put forth, drive thoughtful men into scepticism — a 
result for which such persons care little, so long as the 
esoteric unbelief is concealed by an exoteric respect for 
ecclesiastics. 

And here it is that Romanism harmonises with some 
extreme forms of Anglicanism, to an extent that may 
well prepare the way for reunion. Articles, as we 
have seen, can be easily explained away; Ritualistic 
observances may be practised in common ; misunder- 
standings may, without difficulty, be removed; all 
obstacles, in short, may soon be got out of the way, if 
only it is admitted that there is a perpetual inspiration 
in the Church, carrying with it, of course, everything 
that is necessarily connected therewith. For if, as this 
theory supposes, theology is a science, and like other 
sciences, progressive; yet progress, as Dr. DoUinger 
puts it, ' not like that of chemistry — since there can be 
no discovery of new facts, from which we are to induce 
new laws ; but a progress analogous to that of geometry 
— since it consists in the gradual evolution of the fun- 
damental ideas, the discovery of new relations involved 



THE MODEIiN PHARISEE. 195 

in them, and new spheres in which they are valid ;' if, 
we repeat, this be granted, everything is yielded; since 
only authorised teachers, enjoying the perpetual in- 
spiration assumed to be in the Church, can be fit to 
evolve fundamental ideas, to discover new relations, or 
to decide on the new spheres in which they are valid. 
On this showing, the subjection of mankind everywhere 
to an organised body of ecclesiastics is inevitable.^ 

Only let this great end be secured, and then, as Dr. 
Pusey has told us, ' there is no insurmountable obstacle 
to the union of the Roman, Greek, and Anglican com- 
munions.' A submissive return to the authority of the 
Church thus becomes our only chance of safety. ' Dis- 
sent,' it is thought, would, under such circumstances, 
'undoubtedly break in pieces beneath the silent action 
of universal attraction;' or, which is far more prohahle^ 
be broken up by the hammer of power. 

Let us look these matters fairly in the face. The fun- 
damental principle underlying all that agitates us in the 
present day i-s, a claim, common alike to Roman and 
Anglican, to an uninterrupted succession of the aposto- 
late ; to a teaching authority, akin to that of the apos- 
tles, exercised in interpreting the doctrine of Jesus 
Christ; to the exclusive right of administering what are 
called sacraments. Truly has it been insisted that when 
the Church of England yields this, she yields all. For, 
' with a theory that so closely approximates to that of 
Catholic orthodoxy; with a liturgy drawn exclusively 
from Catholic sources ; and with a catechism capable of 
imbuing the minds of her children with the most Catho- 
lic apprehension of the two principal sacraments — Bap- 
^ See Appendix. Note D. * Church Authority.' 



196 LIBER LIBROETTM. 

tism and the Holy Eucharist — who can doubt the ulti- 
mate reunion of the Anglican Church with the rest of 
Christendom ?' Our choice, then, as we have been re- 
cently told, lies (and lies only) ' between a Christianity 
organised, hierarchical, and dogmatic,' and that simple 
dependence upon God alone, which, instead of produ- 
cing—as some pretend it does — ' a sinful uncertainty of 
mind,' really brings with it peace and joy in believing, 
and a true rest in the Holy Ghost. 

That extreme views on the inspiration of Scripture, 
whether called plenary or verbal, when fearlessly and 
logically carried out, invariably strengthen the hands of 
the enemy is but too clear. They inevitably vest the 
final decision as to what the Book says in man ; its 
value, therefore, is necessarily dependent on the exist- 
ence and authority of an organised body called the 
Church. 

It may indeed be said, and truthfully, that among the 
advocates of verbal inspiration and an infallible book, 
may be found a multitude who expressly repudiate 
Church authority. Those who do so, however, com- 
monly fall back upon what in reality amounts to the 
same thing — the unquestioning acceptance, and, where 
it is possible, the enforcement of an hereditary or tradi- 
tional theology, sometimes expressed in catechisms or 
other official documents, and sometimes in the more 
stringent form of public opinion, controlling the sect to 
which a man belongs. Such are the mischiefs which 
inevitably spring from modern pharisaism, and its idol- 
atry of the Bible. ^ 

On the other hand, supposing all that has been ad- 
' See Appendix. Note B* 'The Idolatry of the Bible.' 



THE MODERN PHARISEE. 197 

vanced to be true, and that the distinction drawn be- 
tween the historical and the ethical portions of the Bible 
is a just one — that some things, therefore, in Scripture 
are not properly God-breathed communication s~^(?Aa^ 
have we lost f By how much are we the poorer ? What 
consolations have fled ? What pillar has been withdrawn 
from the great spiritual edifice ? To what extent, and 
in what way, is the Bible less to us than it was before ? 
Surely it is hard to see that anything whatever has even 
been impaired in worth. 

But it may be replied, ' WJiat have we gainedf* 
Nothing, assuredly, in the w^ay of compromise with the 
unbeliever. Nothing which, in itself, is likely to render 
either Christ or his Gospel less distasteful than it has 
always been to the worldly and the profane. Something, 
however, can scarcely fail to have been accomplished 
towards strengthening the faith of a class who have had 
their confidence in Divine truth shaken by assertions 
which will not bear close examination. Something, it 
may be hoped, towards satisfying such persons that 
instructed Christians do not believe that the Bible can 
be explained away, or that criticism can, step by step, 
undermine its revelations. Something, it may perhaps 
be added, towards the comfort of hope in sonls that have 
stumbled at the word, not because of disobedience, but 
because under that name they have confused the human 
with the Divine. Something, therefore, towards the 
removal of perplexities from minds that have dwelt wath 
a morbid interest on difiJculties for which revelation is 
lot responsible, and which, if incapable of being alto- 
gether removed may, at least, be so diminished as to lose 
their importance, and cease to have mischievous effects. 



CHAPTER XI. 



A POSTSCEIPT. 



Two or three objections relative to matters discussed 
in the foregoing pages having been made in the various 
conversations which the author has had with intelligent 
doubters and others, he refers to them here in order that 
they may be taken for what they are worth. The first 
has been put thus : — 

'You seem to think that the sceptic, while denying 
the authority of the Gospels, is inconsistent enough to 
give the evangelists credit for truly recording what ap- 
peared to them to be miraculous occurrences. This, how- 
ever, is not the fact, since the unbeliever does not admit 
for a moment that the narratives were written down by 
eye-witnesses. Regarding the Gospels as having been 
penned at least half a century after the events they pro- 
fess to record, he holds that the writers, whoever they 
might be, merely express the opinions of the day in 
which they wrote respecting the facts ; that the narra- 
tives they give are not properly speaking factSy but the 
interpretations of a later age respecting the facts. He 
considers that a halo of wonder and supernaturalism 
grew around the history of Christianity in the early part 
of the first century, and that this was reflected in the 



A POSTSCEIPT. 199 

writings of the evangelists. The dilemma, therefore, so 
often put, that these writers were either deceived or 
deceivers, he argues, falls to the ground. They need 
not, he says, have been either. The writers necessarily 
put upon the evangelic history the coloring of the tra- 
ditional sources from which it was derived ; they could 
not have done otherwise. How many times, he ex- 
claims, in the world's history has a mass of supernatural 
belief groion round a nucleus of the purest religious 
idea! All religions are more or less cradled in such be- 
liefs. Hence a man may deny the supernatural in the 
Bible and yet be a good Christian after all. Christian- 
ity is an all-embracing reality; it has actually moulded 
the whole civilisation of the modern world; it lives in 
society, speaks in our laws, and breathes more or less in 
the thoughts, feelings, and moral principles of every 
good man, whatever may be his speculative difficulties. 
Such an one cannot strip himself of Christianity if he 
would ; and, therefore, whatever you may call him, he 
is a Christian, for his nature has been moulded by 
Christian influences.' 

We reply : ' Belief in the miracles of our Lord and 
His disciples does not depend on the amount of evidence 
which can be brought forward in support either of the 
authorship of the Gospels or of the precise time when 
they were composed. Christianity itself, apart alto- 
gether from the particular narratives in question, rests 
on miracle. If Christ be not risen Christianity is a mere 
delusion. On the other hand, if the Redeemer did rise 
from the dead the supernatural is admitted. 

To regard the statements of the evangelists — calm, 
unexcited, colorless as they confessedly are — as mere 



200 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

representations of the excited thoughts and feelings of 
a later age, tinged, or rather tainted, as in this case 
they must be, by the traditional sources from which 
they were derived, is, to say the very least of it, every 
way improbable, ' a most unlikely guess ' at the best. 
Nothing, indeed, strikes one more than the compara- 
tively little effect which, according to the narrative, the 
miracles appear to have produced beyond the limited 
circles in which they were performed. So abundant 
were they, so quietly were they wrought, so unpretend- 
ing was the character of the worker, and so practically 
benevolent His end and aim, that they scarcely seem to 
have been regarded as wonders. The demand still was, 
' give us a sign,' as if signs in abundance were not 
observable on every hand. 

The fact that one great section of the Jews — the 
Pharisees — regarded the entire national history as mi- 
raculous, and lived and died in constant expectation of 
a supernatural deliverer ; that another section — the Sad- 
diicees — denied the spiritual world altogether ; and that 
a third' — the Herodians — had become bound up with 
the support of things as they then were, far from being 
favourable to an easy credulity in relation to Christian- 
ity, must have wrought in an opposite direction. Those 
who believed that their ' own children ' could miracu- 
lously cast out devils ; Herod, who thought that John 
the Baptist had risen from the dead, and the many who 
considered Christ to be ' Elias, or one of the prophets ' 
reappearing upon earth, were none of them men who, 
hke modern sceptics, would deny the supernatural alto- 
gether. Rather would they, as believers in the possi- 
bility of miracles, look the more narrowly into the 



A POSTSCRIPT. 201 

reality of those which were professedly wrought by 
Jesus and His apostles. That they did so, and found 
themselves unable to do more than attribute what they 
could not deny to the agency of Beelzebub, is evidence 
that the lapse of half a century was not needed in order 
to account for miraculous claims — that this element, 
however it may be regarded, was certainly 7iot an after- 
growth. 

Had there been in our Lord's time a prevailing dis- 
belief in miracles, and half a century later a revived 
faith in them, there might be at least some plausible 
ground for supposing that this element gathered in the 
course of years around what was once only a religious 
idea. But there is no pretext for such a conclusion. 
Equally unreasonable is it to assume that no record was 
made of the facts by eye-witnesses, and at the time the 
events occurred; that side by side with a large body of 
persecuted believers, and with fixed institutions estab- 
lished as memorials of supposed facts, nothing should 
exist relating thereto beyond dim, hazy, and untrust- 
worthy traditions. 

The absurdity of the notion that every man is a 
Christian whose nature has, in spite of himself, been 
moulded by Christian influences, whatever may be the 
amount of his unbelief, is obvious, since on this show- 
ing, any virtuous Jew or heathen, who, from whatever 
circumstance, has come under the soul-elevating power 
of the ethical element in the New Testament, has a 
claim to be embraced in the Christian fellovrship, which, 
if faith in the Redeemer be anything at all, is simply an 
extravagance. 
9* 



202 LIBER LIBRORUM. 

The second objection taken is of a directly opposite 
character, and may be expressed thus : — 

' It is not safe to allow that any sceptic can, in a true 
sense, be religious. No man can, properly speaking, be 
such who rejects the basis on which all practical virtue 
rests. No one can be good, so long as the root from 
which his supposed goodness springs is itself but rot- 
tenness.' 

To this sweeping refusal to allow any quarter to the 
doubter, it may be replied that we have no right to 
reject the testimony of Christian men who know such 
persons well, and testify of some, at least, that their 
lives are pure, their spirit unworldly, and their scepti- 
cism rehictant. We have no right to assume that these 
men reject Christ, or that the root from which their 
virtues spring is rottenness. How much truth may be 
doubted, or even denied, without spiritual death, it is 
in many cases impossible for us to say; but we are 
surely justified in believing that where men, though 'per- 
plext in faith, are pure in deeds,' where reverence for 
Scripture has not been cast off, where difficulties relate 
not so much to revealed facts as to human deductions 
intermingled therewith, there is good reason for cher- 
ishing hopes which, at least, forbid us to denounce 
without discrimination. 

It must, however, be admitted that the union of prin- 
ciples which are pre-eminently Christian with the abso- 
lute rejection of Christ, is a feature peculiar to the 
unbelief of* the present day, and that it is one which 
carries with it no common danger. The recent appear- 
ance of a volume of essays, written by Englishmen of 
high talent and standing, ' avowedly for the purpose of 



A POSTSCRIPT. 203 

advocating certain views derived from the writings of 
M. Comte,' is indeed a sign of the times, since Comte 
not only held that the Roman Catholic system was the 
only genuine form of Christianity, but proposes to ' or- 
ganise the education of the West by means of a body 
or order, which can only rest as its prototype, the 
Catholic system did, on a community of faith.' ^ 

' The writers of the Essays generally regard Christian 
influences as pernicious, and there is hardly an essay in 
the volume which is free from attacks upon it ; in some 
of the essays they abound, and are supported by mis- 
representations of Christian teaching. Everywhere the 
quiet assumption is made that Christianity is a thing of 
the past, doomed, and rapidly passing away. Protest- 
antism M. Comte never spoke of but with a protest as 
against a shapeless anarchical system, and he talks of 
being preserved from it with an unction worthy of a 
Romish zealot.' And yet the book contains very much 
that is good. The motto taken as the guide of all 

^ The Essayists are Richard Congreve, M. A., late Fellow and 
Tutor of Wadham College, Oxford ; Frederick Harrison, M. A., 
Fellow and late Tutor of Wadham College, Oxford ; E. S. Beealy, 
M. A., of Wadham College, Oxford, Professor of History at Uni^ 
versity College, London; E. H. Pember, M. A., late Student of 
Christ Church, Oxford ; J. H. Bridges, M. B., late Fellow of Oriel 
College, Oxford ; Charles A. Cookson, B. A., of Oriel College, Ox- 
ford ; and Henry Dix Hutton, of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister-at-Law. In 
the paragraphs inserted referring to the work, it has been thought 
better to adopt the account given of it by the Rev. W. H. Fremantle, 
M. A., in the Cotemp. Rev. (xii.) than to offer any anonymous criti- 
cism. Mr. Fremantle's name and position furnish an adequifte 
guarantee for the truthfulness of his statements. The title of the 
book is ' International Policy : Essays on the Foreign Relations of 
England.' Chapman and Hall. 



204: LIBEE LrBEOKUM. 

moral and political speculation is one which every true 
Christian echoes from the bottom of his heart — ' Vivre 
pour autrui.' 

' The constant reference is to a certain ultimate state 
of human society which is believed to be approaching, 
and of which the secret, though not explained, is sup- 
posed to be with the writers.' Into any details re- 
lating thereto, so far as they can be gathered, it is here 
impossible to enter ; but there is to be 'a high priest 
of humanity, who will be, more truly than any mediae- 
val pope, the only real head of the Western' world;' 
there are to be prayers, and priests, and sacraments, and 
by these the whole world is to be regenerated. ' Once,' 
it is said, ' let the reorganisation of the West be fairly 
secure, and a noble proselyiism will become the princi- 
pal collective occupation of the positive priesthood.' 

A wild dream this must of necessity appear to every 
sensible man, and yet, if M. Comte's notions were mere 
hypotheses, liable to all manner of changes by his fol- 
lowers, why should we be constantly reminded, in a 
solemn manner, that we are in a state of transition, and 
that some final state, which M. Comte's disciples know 
of, is at hand to supersede the present 'transitional 
state, or state anarchy,' by which terms the present con- 
dition of Europe is constantly denoted ? 

^ ' The system of this book, (International PoUcy), says Mr. Har- 
rison in the second essay (p. 152), 'has already been stated in earlier 
pages (Mr. Congreve's Essay, pp. 36 and 41) ; it implies the organisa- 
tion of the West^ upon a system of common moral and intellectual 
principles, and on one uniform tone of pubUc and private Ufe ; the 
whole animated ind knit together by a common education and a 
common body of intellectual teachers and guides. How far we are 
from the realisation of this, it is not the part of this work to consider.' 



A POSTSCRIPT. 205 

Nor should it be unnoticed — although the authors of 
the volume are probably quite unaware of the fact — 
that writers on prophecy have, for the last thirty years, 
amid no little scorn, been repeating their conviction 
that the advent of some organisation of the kind anti- 
cipated is shadowed forth in the Apocalypse, and there 
associated with bitter and bloody persecution, under 
the headship of the last form of Antichrist. 

Such, then, is one phase, and by no means an unim- 
portant one, of the unbelief of the present day. Chris- 
tianity scorned, and its missions derided, yet selfishness 
condemned, duty made supreme, the whole of Western 
Europe looked upon as one great commonwealth, with 
common sympathies and objects, each nation desirous 
of the good of the whole, rather than of its own, and all 
combining to spread their common civilisation among 
the other races of mankind. 

With one thing it is impossible to help being struck, 
viz., the singular change that has taken place in the 
relative positions of Christianity and its opposite since 
Robert Hall published his celebrated sermon on 
• Modern Infidelity.' Then scepticism was described as 
' essentially and infallibly a system of enervation, turpi- 
tude, and vice,' leading to ' the frequent perpetration 
of great crimes, and the total absence of great virtues.' 
Now^ the clergy are warned by this same school that 
'no religious organisation can long hold its ground in 
popular esteem when confronted by a loftier morality 
than its own.' Then it was said of unbelief, ^ attention 
to self is the spring of every movement and the motive 
to which every action is referred.' Now the motto 
taken as a guide by them is ' Yivre pour autrui,' and 



£06 LIEER LIBROKUM. 

the principle kept continually in view, 'The subordina- 
tion of politics to morals.' 

Then priests of all kinds, simply as such^ were hated: 
JVoiv an order so called is regarded as essential to the 
regeneration of the world. Then Rome and unbelief 
appeared to have little or nothing in common. JVoio^ 
whether consciously or unconsciously, they habitually 
support and strengthen each other. Then unbelievers 
alleged it to be a grievous defect in the morality of the 
Gospel, that it neglected to inculcate patriotism, and the 
Christian advocate had to urge that it was wise in God 
'to decline the express inculcation of a principle so liable 
to degenerate into excess.' JVow we are told our great 
object should be ' to bring into political relations the 
spirit of unselfishness,' and to regard love of country as 
a great evil when it conflicts with the love of the human 
race. 

And yet, in spite of all these differences, the old 
hatred to Christianity prevails, and greatly should we 
err if we concluded that any essential change had 
actually taken place. It still remains certain that 
* whenever the religious feeling or instinct in man 
works freely, without an historical revelation, it must 
beget a system of priestcraft ; an intellectual priest- 
hood it may be, but inevitably one more intolerant, 
exclusive, and oppressive than any other with which 
the world has ever been cursed.'^ 

The third objection, different from either of the pre- 
ceding, will, it is to be feared, be a popular one. It 
runs thus : — 

' Why meddle at all with this difficult and dangerous 
^ See Maurice's Lectures on the Religions of the World. 



A POSTSCRIPT. 207 

subject? True Christians, resting in implicit faith on 
Scripture, can only be unsettled and injured by learning 
that there is even room for a doubt regarding the ab- 
solute inspiration of any portion of the Bible. If there 
is indeed a weak point in the arguments usually brought 
forward to support either the plenary or verbal theory, 
far better is it to throw a cloak over such a defect than 
to unveil it before the world, however good may be the 
intention. Belief in what the Bible contains is neces- 
sarily to most persons a prejudice, and the cases are 
few in which this can be exchanged for a conviction. 
Why then shake a prejudice which is so useful when 
you are unable to ensure its being superseded by any- 
thing better ? 

* To the sceptic you can do no good. His mind is 
made up to reject a revelation which, if true, condemns 
him. He will only argue from your admissions that if 
it is lawful to draw any line between the inspired and 
uninspired in Scripture, the whole question of its accept- 
ance or rejection comes to be one of degree only. The 
same criticism which you think justifies doubt in relation 
to the narrative of the execution of Saul's seven sons, 
carries him somewhat further, and if he ends in excluding 
the story of the Resurrection itself, he has only to thank 
you for the example.' 

We reply : The ground here taken assumes that it is 
better for men to abide in error, if it can be made use- 
ful, than to arrive at truth if accompanied by possible 
danger. It is the old distrust of the merely true as such, 
and so far indicates want of confidence in Him who is 
emphatically ' the Truth.' Such is essentially the spirit 
of Rome, for it proceeds on the supposition that men 



208 LIBEB LIBEOEUM. 

must, at all hazards, be led into what may be regarded 
as the right path, whatever may be the means used. 
The end sanctifies all. This course is an immoral one, 
and cannot therefore, be sustained. An unshaken faith 
in God, in truth, and in uprightness can alone deliver us 
from the wretched delusion involved in all such miserable 
expedients. 

That any true Christian is likely to have his confi- 
dence shaken by honest investigation is not to be 
believed for a moment by anyone who really considers 
what Divine trust is, and the grounds on which it rests, 
That the hardened sceptic may be incapable of estimat- 
ing the force of any reasoning which is presented to him 
in favour of the authority of the Bible is likely enough. 
But let us remember that the man thus spoken of was 
not always unimpressible. There was, in all probability, 
a time in his mental history, as there has been in that 
of most of us, when the syren voice of the doubter was 
listened to with a strange admixture of fear and wonder; 
when its charm was found rather in the feeling of inde- 
pendence that it flattered than in the force of its sugges- 
tions ; when a bold treatment would have been success- 
ful; when an opposite course — timidity, distrust denun- 
ciation — on the part of the believer proved fatal. It is 
for men in this stage — and at the present moment they 
are a countless multitude — ^that we now write. Should 
they reflect on that which has been written it may 
surely be expected that to some the Book will be found 
beneficial, a hope which we would on no account ex- 
change for the plaudits of a world, however ' religious ' 
that ' world ' might call itself. 

As for the pretence — for it is really nothing better — 



A POSTSCRIPT. 209 

that to give up anything in the Bible is in effect to give 
up all ; that if a line is to be drawn anywhere its place 
must be fixed by the caprice of the reader; it is enough 
to observe that the real question is not how much or 
how little may be regarded as human in Scripture, but 
on what ground the distinction in question is proposed 
to be made. Reason, it is granted, is not in itself ade- 
quate to judge as to what is or is not worthy of God. 
Taste, caprice, preconceptions of any kind have nothing 
whatever to do with the matter. If the rebuke to 
Balaam or the deliverance of Jonah are to be rejected 
because it seems incredible or grotesque that an ass 
should speak or a whale disgorge its living burden, we 
adopt a principle which certainly leads to the construc- 
tion rather than to the reception of a Divine revelation. 
But if, on the contrary, we confine ourselves to the test 
of congruity ; if we accept or reject only on the ground 
of the harmony or want of harmony which a statement 
has with other revelations, with all that God has taught 
us whether by the servant or by the Son regarding His 
own character and will ; if we do this in dependence on 
the teaching of that Spirit which, as an unction from the 
Holy One, is given to ' the lowly heart and pure ;' if we 
but follow the example of those early Christians who 
tried the spirits whether they were of God or not, we 
may be quite sure that the danger supposed is altogether 
iniagiuary, and that 'the honest mind, calmly seeking 
after God's truth in the spirit He approves, will not be 
at a loss to make sufficient distinction between religious 
or ethical truth and departments belonging to the natu- 
ral and human.' 

He who wishes to confound them will easily succeed 



210 LIBER LIBROEUM. 

ill doing so ; but ' he who sincerely seeks to distinguish 
the minor parts, in which the correctness of inspiration 
does not necessai'ily he, from the moral and religious 
elements constituting revelation proper,' may do so 
without difficulty. ' The religious and theological ele- 
ment,' says Dr. Pye Smith, ' or whatever contains reli- 
gious truth, precept, or expectation, cannot hut appear 
perfectly distinct and manifest to any man who under- 
stands language, and is not previously determined to 
pervert what is plainly before his eyes.' 

One word more. Experience has taught us that, in 
the present day, the rejection of the Bible is almost in- 
variably followed by painful questionings, sometimes as 
to the existence and sometimes as to the character of 
God. Let us realise the fact that it can scarcely ever 
be otherwise. Apart from Scripture, it is impossible to 
know anything of the Creator which can assure us either 
of His presence or His will ; of His relation to us or of 
our condition before Him. How important, then, is it 
that the first beginnings of doubt should be honestly 
dealt with ! How foolish to think or speak of the ac- 
ceptance or rejection of 'the Book' as a light thing, so 
long as we come under the influences which Christianity 
has diffused over the globe. The truth or falsehood of 
the Bible, its worth or its worthlessness, is the great 
question of the day. It is not too much to affirm that 
the life or death of modern society hangs upon the issue. 



NOTES 



A. (Chap. ii. p. 65.) 

emiite:n't witnesses. 

The following, among others, may be quoted : — 

HooKEE. 'As incredible praises given unto men do often 
abate and impair the credit of their deserved commendation, 
so we must likewise take great heed, lest in attributing unto 
Scripture more than it can have, the incredibility of that do 
cause even those things which indeed it hath most abundantly 
to be less esteemed.' ^ 

Baxtee (Richard). ' Here I must tell you a great and need- 
ful truth, which ignorant Christians, fearing to confess, by 
overdoing tempt men to infidelity. The Scripture is like a 
man's body, where some parts are but for the preservation of 
the rest, and may be maimed without death. The sense is 
the soul of tlie Scripture, and the letters but the body or 
vehicle.' ^ 

TiLLOTSON (Archbishop). ' If any man is of opinion that 
Moses might write the history of those actions which he him- 
self did, or was present at, without an immediate revelation 
of them; or that Solomon, by his natural and acquired wis- 
dom, might speak those wise sayings which are in his Proverbs ; 
■ or that the Evangelists might write what they heard and saw, 
or what they had good assurance of from others, as St. Luke 
tells us he did ; or that St. Paul might write for his cloak and 

1 Hooker, p. 274. a Wordsworth's Christian Institutes. 



212 KOTES. 

parchment at Troas, and salute by name his friends and 
brethren ; or that he might advise Timothy to drink a little 
wine, &c., without the immediate dictate of the Spirit of 
God: he seems to have reason on his side.' ^ 

Waebueton. *Thus we see the advantages resulting from 
a Paetial Inspiration as here contended for and explained ; 
it answers all the ends of a Scripture universally and organ- 
ically inspired, by producing an unerring rule of faith and 
manners ; and, besides, obviates all those objections to inspira- 
tion which arise from the too high notion of it, such as trifling 
errors in circumstances of small importance.' ^ 

Palet. ' The books (of the Old Testament) were universally 
read and received by the Jews of our Saviour's time. He and 
His apostles, in common with all other Jews, referred to them, 
alluded to them, used them : yet, except where he expressly 
ascribes a Divine authority to particular predictions, I do not 
know that we can strictly draw any conclusion from the books 
being so used and applied, besides the proof which it unques- 
tionably is, of their notoriety and reception at that time.' ^ 

Scott (Thomas). *By the Divine inspiration of the Holy 
Scriptures, I mean such an immediate and complete discovery 
by the Holy Spirit to the minds of the sacred penmen of those 
things which could not have teen otherwue Icnown^ and such an 
effectual superintending as to those things which they might 
be informed of by other means, as entirely to preserve them 
from error in every particidar which could in the least degree 
affect any of the doctrines or commandments contained.' * 

Watson (Bishop). 'As to the apostles themselves, when- 
ever they wrote or spoke concerning Christianity that fund of 
inspiration kept them right. But they were reasonable 
creatures as well as inspired apostles, and therefore could 
speak or write about common affairs as men that have the use 
of their reason without any inspiration can easily do.'^ 

1 Sermon 168, p. 449, fol. 4 Essays, p. 3. 

a Works, 4to, 1778, pp. 556, 557. » Tracts, p. 446. 

^ Evidences of Christianity, p. 291. 



EMINENT WITNESSIS. 213 

ToMLiN-E (Bishop). ' They (the sacred penmen) were some- 
times left to the common use of their faculties, and did not 
upon every occasion stand in need of supernatural communica- 
tion ; buf whenever and as far as the Divine assistance was 
necessary it was always afforded.' ^ 

Whately (Archbishop). ' In the first place we should bear 
in mind what parts of the Bible are to be regarded as strictly 
and properly bearing the character of revelation. A great 
part of it is historical ; and though we believe the sacred his- 
torians to have been under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to 
lead them into all necessary religious truth, to guard them 
against any material error, and in some few cases, to inform 
them of what could not be known by human means; yet, the 
very nature of history is such that it would be unreasonable 
to expect to find each single event that is narrated to be a 
matter of high importance.' ^ 

Hinds (Bishop). 'To Religious instruction of whatever 
kind is confined the Scriptural character of Scripture, the 
agency of the Holy Spirit. It is not, therefore, truth of all 
kinds that the Bible was inspired to teach, but only such 
truth as tends to religious edification ; and the Bible is conse- 
quently infallible as regards this, and this alone.' ^ 

Smith (Dr. Pye). ' I regard as inspired Scripture all that 
refers to holy things, all that can bear the character of 
"Oracles of God," and admit the rest as appendages of the 
nature of private memoirs or public records, useful to the 
antiquary and the philologist, but which belong not to the 
rule of faith or the directory of practice. To this extent, and 
this only, can I regard the sanction of the ]^ew Testament as 
given to the inspiration of the Old. Inspiration belongs to 
Religious objects, and to attach it to other things is to lose 
sight of its nature, and misapply its design.' 

' I can find no end of my anxiety, no rest for my faith, no 

satisfaction for my understanding, till I embrace the senti- 

1 Theology, pp. 21-2. 2 Essays, p. 223. 

s On the Inspiration of Scripture. 



214 NOTES. 

ment that the qualities of sanctity and inspiration belong 
only to the religious and theoretical element which is diffused 
through the Old Testament ; and that where this element is 
absent — where there is nothing adapted to communicate 
" doctrine, reproof, correction, or instruction in righteous- 
ness," nothing fitted to ^'make the man of God perfect, 
thoroughly furnished unto every good work " — there we are 
not called to acknowledge any inspiration, nor warranted to 
assume it.^^ 

Nine of these extracts are made from the ' Defence of the 
Rev. Rowland Williams, D. D., in the Arches Court of Can- 
terbury, b}'' James Fitzjames Stephen, M. A., of the Inner 
Temple, Barrister-at-Law, Recorder of E'ewark-on -Trent.' 
The three last are from * The Text of the Old Testament 
Considered,' by Samuel Davidson, D. D. 



B. (Chap. ix. p. 173.) 
BIBLICAL IN"TERPRETATIOK 

A brief glance at the history of Biblical interpretation, 
regarded as a science, will alone be sufficient to explain how 
it is that the Sacred Volume has come to be regarded as in- 
definite in its teachings, and more or less unintelligible in its 
utterances. Any l)ooTc^ treated as it has been, must necessarily 
be stamped with that character. 

The following sketch is abridged from an article on Inter- 
pretation, by Dr. Credner, found in Kitto's Biblical Cyclo- 
paedia, edited by Dr. W. L. Alexander of Edinburgh. 

Three different modes of interpreting the Bible have at 
different periods been adopted : the Grammatical, the Al- 
legorical, and the Doomatioal. 

The grammatical mode of interpretation simply investi- 

* Paper in Cong. Mag. (July, 1837), quoted from Davidson. 



BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 215 

gates the sense contained in the words of the Bible. The 
allegorical maintains that the words of Scripture have, 
besides their simple sense, another which is concealed as 
behind a picture, and endeavours to find out this supposed 
figurative sense. The dogmatical endeavours to explain the 
Bible in harmony with the dogmas of the Church, following 
the principle of analogia fidei. The chief expedient adopted 
in order to efi*ect harmony of interpretation has been to con- 
sider certain articles of faith to be Leading Docteines, and 
to regulate and define accordingly the sense of the Bible 
wherever it appeared doubtful and uncertain. 

When the principle of one general Catholic Church was 
adopted, it was found difiicult to select doctrines by the appli- 
cation of which to Biblical interpretation a perfect harmony 
could be eftected. Yet the wants of science powerfully de- 
manded a systematical arrangement of Biblical doctrines. 
This sense of need led first of all to allegorical interpretation. 
Origen argues thus: 'The Holy Scriptures inspired by God 
form an harmonious whole, perfect in itself, without any de- 
fects and contradictions, and containing nothing that is insig- 
nificant and superfluous. Grammatical interpretation leads to 
obstacles and objections which are inadmissible. N^ow, since 
the merely grammatical interpretation can neither remove nor 
overcome these objections, we must seek for an expedient 
beyond the boundaries of grammatical interpretation. The 
allegorical offers this expedient, and consequently is above 
the grammatical.' 

Allegorical interpretation, however, it soon appeared, could 
not be reduced to settled rules, since it necessarily depends 
upon the greater or less influence of the imagination ; so in pro- 
cess of time there gradually sprung up the dogmatical mode, 
founded upon the interpretations of ecclesiastical teachers who 
were recognised as orthodox in the Catholic Church. This 
more and more supplanted the allegorical, which henceforward 
was left to the wit and ingenuity of a few individuals. 



216 NOTES. 

After the coinmenceraent of the fifth century, partly in con- 
sequence of the full development of the ecclesiastical system of 
doctrines defined in all their parts, and partly by continually 
increasing ignorance of the languages in which the Bible was 
written, interpretation was confined to the mere collection of 
explanations which had first been given by men whose ecclesi- 
astical orthodoxy was regarded as unquestionable. 

During the middle ages, however, allegorical interpretation 
prevailed, chiefly because it gave satisfaction to sentiment, and 
afforded occupation to free mental speculation. 

When in the fifteenth century classical studies revived, gram- 
matical interpretation, which, as a rule, goes hand in hand with 
progress, again rose to honour. It was especially by this wea- 
pon that the domineering Catholic Church was combated at 
the period of the Reformation ; but as soon as the newly- 
sprung-up Protestant Church had been dogmatically established, 
it began to consider grammatical interpretation a dangerous 
adversary of its own dogmas, and opposed it as much as did 
the Roman Catholics themselves. Allegorical interpretation, 
therefore, in due time reappeared under the form of typical 
and mystical theology, as it always does when the dogmatic 
mode exercises an unnatural pressure. 

Towards the beginning of the eighteenth century gram- 
matical interpretation recovered its authority, and, in spite of 
continual attacks, towards the conclusion of that century it 
decidedly prevailed among German Protestants. During the 
last thirty years, however, both Protestants and Roman Catho- 
lics have again curtailed its rights and invaded its province, 
by promoting the opposing claims of dogmatical and mystical 
interpretation. 

The question really demanding a settlement is this : Whether 
the rules and gifts which qualify a man for the right under- 
standing of ordinary written language are, or are not, sufficient 
for rightly understanding the Bible? Most Biblical interpreters 
have declared such rules and gifts to be insufficient, because, 



NATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS . 217 

say they, the Bible, having been written under the direct 
guidance of the Holy Ghost, is not to be measured by the 
common rules which are applicable only to the lower sphere 
of merely human thoughts and compositions. The result has 
been that interpretation has become neither more nor less than 
the art of understanding the Bible according to the particular 
ecclesiastical system that may be in vogue at any given period. 

But surely it will be allowed that if God has deemed it de- 
sirable to reveal His Will to mankind by means of intelligible 
books. He must have intended that the contents of those books 
should be discovered in accordance witli those general laws 
which are conducive to the right understanding of documents 
in general. For if this were not the case. He would have 
chosen insufficient and even contradictory means inadequate to 
the purpose He had in view, which cannot be supposed. 

The interpretation which, in spite of all ecclesiastical opposi- 
tion, ought to be adopted as the only true one, is unquestion- 
ably that which has in modern times been styled the Histoeico- 
Grammatical. This appellation has been chosen because the 
epithet grammatical seems to be too narrow and too much 
restricted to the mere verbal sense. It might be more correct 
to style it simply the Histoeical interpretation, since the word 
historical comprehends everything that is requisite to be known 
about the language, the turn of mind, and the individuality of 
an author, so far as this knowledge is needful in order rightly 
to understand his book. 



0. (Chap. ix. p. 182.) 

NATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS. 

Those — and they are possibly but few of the present gene- 
ration — who have carefully read Coleridge's remarkable book 
* On the Constitution of the Church and State according to the 
10 



218 NOTES. 

. (■ 

idea of each,' ^ will be aware that the author attaches, and not 
without reason, great importance to the distinction therein 
drawn between the National Church and the Church of Christ. 

'The Christian Church,' he says, 4s a public and visible 
community, having ministers of its own, whom the State can 
neither constitute nor degrade, and whose maintenance among 
Christians is as secure as the command of Christ can make it : 
for " so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the 
Gospel should live of the Grospel " (1 Cor. ix. 14). ... 'It (the 
Church of Christ) is the opposite to the world only, asking of 
any particular State neither wages nor dignities, but demand- 
ing protection, that is, to be let alone.' 

' The National Church is a public and visible community, 
having ministers whom the nation, through the agency of a 
constitution, hath created trustees of a reserved national fund, 
upon fixed terms and with defined duties, and whom, in case of 
breach of these terms or dereliction of those duties, the nation, 
through the same agency, may discharge.' 

This distinction, although not formally drawn, is clearly in- 
volved in the conflicting definitions given of ' the Church ' in 
the nineteenth Article of the Anglican communion, and in the 
work of its great defender, ' the judicious Hooker.' 

According to the Article (xix.), ' The Church is a congrega- 
tion o^ faithful men.' According to Hooker it is a mixed com- 
munity of faithful and unfaithful^ comprehending the worst 
as well as the best. 'It is known,' he says, 'by an external 
profession of Christianity, without regard in any respect had 
to the moral virtues or spiritual graces of any member of that 

1 3rd Ed. Edited by Henry Nelson Coleridge, Esq. Pickering, 1839. This 
little work — 'the only M^ork,' eays the editor, 'that I know or have ever heard 
mentioned that even attempts a solution of the difficulty in which an ingenious 
enemy of the Church of England may easily involve most ot its modern defenders 
— Mr. Coleridge prized highly. The saving distinctions,' he said, 'are plainly 
stated in it, and I am sure nothing is wanted to make them tell^ but that some 
kind friend should steal them from their obscure hiding-place, and just tumble 
them down before the public as Ms own.^ (Table Talk, p. 5.) 



NATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS. 219 

body. Yea, although they may be impious idolaters, wicked 
heretics, imps and limbs of Satan.' The apparent contradiction 
arises from the word ' Church ' being used in totally different 
senses. By ' the Church ' the framer of the Article evidently 
means the Episcopal communion. By the same phrase Hooker 
as clearly understands the nation at large. 

Why, then, should these two distinct institutions, the Epis- 
copal Church and the Church of the nation, always be dealt 
with as if they were one and identical ? Why should the State 
not be able to exercise its right of legislating for the Church 
of the nation without at the same time interfering with the 
Christian liberty of the congregation of the faithful? The 
answer is obvious : Simply because these two having been once 
one, we continue, in defiance of facts, to act on the theory that 
the Episcopal Church is still the Church of the nation. We do 
so partly, no doubt, from the difficulty of perceiving how, in 
case of separation, the ministers of the nation could, if they 
wished it, be also ministers of the Episcopal communion ; 
partly from the unwillingness of the clerical body, in spite of 
unfavourable statistics, to consent, cden for lil)erty^ to be re- 
garded as anything less than the National Church. 

To what extent these obstacles are capable of being over- 
come it is at present impossible to say ; but the fact that, on 
the one hand, hostile seceders, embracing at least half of those 
who attend public worship at all, largely clamour for a change ; 
that, on the other, demands hitherto unknown are now made 
by multitudes of the Established Clergy to Komanise the 
National Church at will ; that a growing sense of the right of 
every Christian communion to regulate its own doctrine and 
discipline is pervading society ; and yet that the English peo- 
ple, Protestant to the core, are as much as ever attached to 
their ancestral form of worship : these things combined will 
probably before long compel the enquiry whether or no it is 
not possible so to separate the Episcopal Church from the 
Church of the nation (or, as it should rather be expressed, 



220 NOTES, 

from the National Religious Institute^ for such would not pro- 
perly speaking be a Church) that the one, whether ritualistic 
or otherwise, might enjoy all the liberty of a voluntary society, 
and the other be made acceptable to the multitudes who now 
reject and despise it. 

This is not the place to discuss details. But it may not be 
amiss to say that the supposed difficulty of accomplishing such 
a change is probably exaggerated. The basis on which the 
separation in question might be effected is in some particulars 
obvious enough. The Apostles' Creed, and such portions of 
the Book of Common Prayer as are in harmony therewith, 
would remain in use, while the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, 
the Offices, and the Communion Service would be appropriated 
by the Episcopal Church. Baptisms, marriages, and funerals, 
as more or less civil acts, might continue to be performed with 
suitable offices by the national clerisy, those who were dissatis- 
fied with what they would regard as 'maimed rites' supple- 
menting them by such additional services as they might deem 
necessary. The recognition of Dissenting baptisms, the pre- 
sence of the Eegistrar in a Nonconformist place of >vorship in 
order to legalise a marriage, and quarrels about the right of 
sepulture in parochial churchyards would then all be rendered 
needless. That which is national would be treated nationally, 
while that which properly belongs to Churches would be left 
untouched by the State. 

Parochial edifices would of course remain as public property 
in the hands of the respective parishes to which they already 
belong. The chapels-of-ease, the district churches, and all 
private endowments would properly fall into the hands of the 
Episcopal Church. Parochial organisation would be un- 
touched. In every .parish throughout the kingdom there 
would still remain the 'germ of civilisation,' and in the 're- 
motest villages a nucleus round which the capabilities of the 
place might crystallise and brighten.' 

It is of course easy to multiply objections to any such 



NATIONAL ESTABLISPIMENTS. 221 

scheme, and especially on the ground that it would practically 
be found impossible so to recast the National Church as to 
make either its teaching or its offices acceptable to everybody. 
But this need not be attempted. The reconstruction would 
of course proceed on recognised facts, such as that England 
is a Protestant nation ; that her laws and institutions are all 
based on Christianity as revealed in the Bible ; that, as a fact, 
all but a very small number indeed of those who care about 
religion at all agree in great leading principles and doctrines. 

That under any arrangement some clergymen would, as 
now, attach more importance to one class of religious thought 
than another ; that some would be Broad and others Evangel- 
ical ; that there would still be room for forbearance with one 
another can scarcely be doubted; but essentially no difficulties 
would arise at all corresponding in importance to those which 
now trouble us. We should at least be delivered from the 
inconsistency of attempting by Parliamentary authority to 
change or to modify the formularies of a Church which, if 
a Church at all, may well resist all pressure on the part of the 
State to force its doctrine. Tlie appointment of a clergyman, 
whether vested as now in patrons or given to the parish, might 
easily be ordered, and his removal, if needful, would be under 
the jurisdiction of the courts of law. 

Perhaps it is not too much to say that if the distinction here 
urged had originally been recognised, the long struggle of 
Puritanism for liberty of conscience would have been rendered 
needless, and Dissent at the present day might have been un- 
known. Supplementary fellowships of a voluntary character 
would have supplied all deficiencies, and the Church, instead 
of being the deadly antagonist of a multitude of sects, would 
have been the fruitful mother of as many independent com- 
munities as the necessities of the case, whether arising from 
spiritual needs or from changes of opinion, might in course of 
time have required. 

The error of the Eeformers, or rather of those who yielded 



222 - NOTES. 

to their influence, was that thej failed to see, or seeing disre- 
garded, the fact that the great ecclesiastical system from which 
they had broken off was at once a polity and a religion ; that 
if in one aspect it was a power having its centre at Eome, in 
another it was a conviction having its root in the individual 
conscience. Had they regarded this aright they would, as 
statesmen, have dealt with Komanism somewhat differently. 
Eeligion, as such, under whatever form, would have been let 
alone. It would then have been perceived that Protestantism, 
from its very nature, must necessarily increase individuality 
of delief; and suitable provision having been made for the 
development of this inevitable tendency, by absolute freedom 
being secured to each and all to supplement what they felt to be 
wanting by voluntary action, an institution would have sprung 
into existence which would have proved, far more than any 
national Church ever has or can do, a true bond of unity ; at 
once loyal to the monarch and acceptable to the people. 

This result would have followed, simply because a provision 
for social worship and public teaching, the want of men in 
general, would in that case have been fully met. God would 
have been recognised nationally without individual consciences 
being interfered with ; and everything pertaining to the pecu- 
liar religious convictions of each separate person — to his per- 
sonal relations to God and duty, would have been left to be 
met by that voluntary provision which men are always wil- 
ling *to make when the religions instinct has been thoroughly 
awakened, and earnestness has taken the place of indifference. 
Need it be observed that to a national clerisy chosen and 
controlled as these would be, separated from any particular 
Church, and therefore without a motive to proselytism, the 
superintendence of the education of the nation might well be 
entrusted. 

To speak of embracing Wesleyans and other seceders in the 
Church of England, by absol-bing them, after they have built 
so many thousands of places of worship, and when, by means 



NATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS. 223 

thereof, they can secure good incomes for their ministers, is 
the most idle of dreams. A Protestant Church in a free 
country like our own can never successfully imitate the Church 
of Eome by uniting to herself difterent orders under control of 
any kind. But she can do what is far better. She can take 
undei her wing all forms of devout thought. She can win 
them to herself by the love of a large heart, and by the willing 
recognition, nay the honouring, of an individuality which is 
the offspring of freedom, the proof of earnestness, and the sta- 
bility of all that is true and good. 

The great error of the Church of England, regarded as a 
national establishment, has been that she has never had faith 
in herself; she has never had strength to believe in anything 
better than mere outward conformity or professed unity of 
opinion. But it cannot be the true policy of any national 
Church thus to necessitate if not to promote secession. On 
the contrary, her voice should always be, ' Obey conscience, 
follow truth, but, if possible, abide with your brethren. We 
may not be one in all points, but we can at least unite in com- 
mon prayer and praise, and in a common recognition of the 
Giver of every good and perfect gift.' 

England swarms with Dissenters only because the Church 
of England has never allowed any safety-valve for Christian 
zeal or individual convictions. She may yet make herself 
the Church of the nation if she will, but it must be by sepa- 
rating herself as an establishment alike from the Episcopal 
and from every other Church. How long that opportunity 
may last none can say. In Ireland the time for so doing has 
perhaps already past. Nothing in all probability will satisfy 
a people whose public sentiment is formed by a priesthood 
ever panting after pre-eminence, hvii possession of the revenues 
of the Church, or, if this cannot be had, their secularisation. 
Yet who does not feel that, if it were possible to devote these 
funds to any religious service which could be accepted, as far 
as it went^ by Eomanists as well as Protestants, how much 



224 NOTES. 

better such a disposal of them would be than to employ them 
in endowing rival Churches or in any work of a merely secular 
character. 

Those who may be disposed to meet these observations with 
sarcasm or scorn, may well be reminded that the root-thought 
on which they have proceeded belongs to a man who is uni- 
versally admitted to have been one of the deepest thinkers of 
his age ; a man who was Conservative in his politics, and more 
than usually attached to the Episcopal Church. Nor should 
tlie hints he has offered be regarded as unworthy of considera- 
tion because intended to be worked out by others whenever a 
time should arrive in which they would be listened to. 



D. (Chap. X. p. 195.) 
CHUECH AUTHOKITY. 

The position and claim of the Church as a great teacher, and 
as a guide to truth, cannot be separated from any fair enquiry 
into the place which Scripture ought to occupy in the formation 
of our beliefs. The existence or non-existence of an institu- 
tion claiming the right sometimes of deciding what is truth, 
and sometimes of supplementing that truth by tradition, can- 
not but be an important element in all investi^-i' ' >'^s bearing 
upon the Bible. 

For is the point at issue, as is generally supposed, merely 
one of degree. The thing needing to be established is, not to 
what extent any existing ecclesiastical body may or may not 
have authority in controversies of faith ; nor yet, whether or 
no, any actual Church holds in its own bosom a deposit of 
apostolic tradition ; but whether any such body, liaving Divine 
authority for its institution, exists in the icorld. For if it does, 
nothing can be more obvious than that to its decisions, so far 
as it is empowered to give them, it becomes all of us to bow. 



CHURCH AUTHORITY. 225 

Hitherto this great question has been treated rather with 
reference to the extent of power claimed by any given Church, 
than to the reality or non-reality of the existence of such an 
organisation by Divine appointment. That authority of some 
Mnd or other over opinions, as well as over conduct, is vested 
in all Churches, however small or sectarian they may be, 
seems everywhere to be taken for granted. 

Of course, so long as it is understood that this claim merely 
implies that, like secular associations, religious bodies may 
justly fix the conditfons on which any person shall be received 
into, or retained in, their fellowship, no one has a right to dis- 
pute its propriety. But more than this is commonly meant ; 
since all alike imagine they have the Divine sanction for what 
they do, and act accordingly. Leaders of sects may not indeed 
ask to be regarded as successors of the apostles ; they may, on 
the contrary, energetically disclaim all such assumptions ; and 
yet they both may and do not unfrequently exercise the power 
such a succession is supposed to confer, with far more strin- 
gency than those who put forward higher pretensions. 

The question needing to be settled is, whether or no Christ 
and His apostles ever appointed successors, or ever gifted any 
man or body of men with power or ability to decide for others 
what ought or ought not to be believed. 

Put in this way, the enquiry primarily, if not exclusively, 
bears upon such ecclesiastical bodies as have formally demanded 
the recognition of their right to settle controversies, by virtue 
of a commission received from ChHst. 

The reasoning by which this claim has hitherto been sus- 
tained cannot but be regarded as in man yrespects very unsatis- 
factory. It is argued, that inasmuch as probably a quarter of 
a century must have passed away before any Gospel or Epistle 
was produced ; that as those who at length did write tell us 
for the most part that they were moved to do so by passing 
circumstances ; that as they had evidently no thought of leav- 
ing behind them any full confession of faith ; that since they 
10* 



22G NOTES. 

did not affirm in detail the doctrine of the Trinity, or expound 
other mysteries ; and since there is no trace of a collection of 
apostolical writings, or of the formation of a New Testament # 
canon by John or any other influential Christian of the apos- 
tolic age, it could never be intended that men should take the 
Scriptures alone as their rule of faith, or that they should seek 
in them exclusively for a knowledge of God's revelation. 

This view is supposed to find confirmation in the fact that 
Paul bids Timothy commit to faithful men what Tie had ' heard ' 
from apostolic lips, that they might teach others also, and that 
he commands both the Corinthians and the Thessalonians to 
hold fast ' the traditions ' they had been taught. These un- 
written teachings, therefore, as handed down by the Church 
are, it is asserted, essential to the securing of Christian doc- 
trine in all its fulness, pure and certain through all generations. 

Further, it is argued, that as Christianity was but an out- 
growth of Judaism, the ancient priesthood had to be replaced 
by the spiritual succession of duly-appointed instructors, and 
that as the first Christians had received apostolic teaching 
not as the word of man, but as the Word of God, a provision 
was needed for securing to after-times a like repose in author- 
ity by the appointment of a living, ever-speaking tribunal open 
and accessible to all. 

Whether such authority is supposed to centre in an indivi- 
dual, as the Pope, or in a body like the Church, matters little. 
The Romanist of course holds to the former ; and in so doing 
maintains that the first deposit of doctrine was intended to 
have an organic growth, and to expand from its roots by a law 
of inward necessity, and in a manner corresponding to the in- 
tellectual needs of believers in different ages. There was to 
be, he says, a constant building up of doctrine as a progressive 
development, a mapping out of its details, and an exhibition of 
its full contents, secured and fixed by ecclesiastical decision, 
and all was to be accomplished under the guidance of the 
Paraclete, the teacher given to the Church. 



CHURCH AUTHOEITY. 227 

It is not needful to enquire how much of this is held only 
hy Romanists, how much belongs to Anglicanism, or how 
much is involved in the action of every E'onconforming com- 
munity. What we want to know is, whether the root-idea 
has, or has not, any good foundation ; whether there is really 
any reason to believe that the provision spoken of was ever 
made. The words of St. Paul, whether to Timothy or to the 
Gentile churches, prove nothing, unless it can be shown that 
the traditions he refers to were distinct from, or additional to, 
what is now embodied in the Gospels and the Epistles. The 
entire question is one of fact, one therefore respecting which 
we can know nothing, beyond what is left on record in Scrip- 
ture. 

ISTow, there we find no trace of any teaching similar in 
character to that which is supposed to be so essential. The 
apostles do not merely tell people what they ought to believe, 
as if that were enough ; they do not even ask that anything 
should be received, simply on their responsibility or authority. 
St. Paul utterly disclaims any wish to have dominion over the 
faith of his converts. ' By faith ' he says, ' ye stand.' ' We 
are but helpers of your joy.' To the Corinthians he writes, 
'I speak as unto wise men, judge ye what I say.' The Gala- 
tians he warns not only against men who might preach an- 
other Gospel, but against himself if he should ever be led to 
do so. St. Peter exhorts elders ' as also an elder.' St. John 
directly appeals to his hearers as able to distinguish between 
truth, and falsehood. All the apostles, in short, seem to have 
regarded themselves chiefly as witnesses of facts. When a 
new one had to be chosen in place of Judas, the reason given 
is, that he might be a witness with the rest of the resurrec- 
tion. Everything they teach, is presented in the simplest form 
possible. Nothing can be found at all corresponding to the 
scholastic definitions of later times ; nothing tending to indi- 
cate that such definitions would ever be desirable. 

The evangelical narrative, as we have it, leaves quite a con- 



228 NOTES. 

trary impression to that wliicli assumes tlie formal appoint- 
ment of a body of men as in any way inheritors of apostolic 
powers or apostolic wisdom. The few believers are gathered 
together in fellowships of the simplest character, that as 
* sheep among Avolves,' they may exhort and strengthen one 
another. Elders chosen from their midst are appointed over 
them, and endowed Avith gifts ''fitting them, in the absence of 
written documents, rightly to teach and govern these infant 
communities. The}'' 'break bread' together in memory of 
their Lord, apparently without the intervention of any officer 
of the Church. They possess, but they have no power of 
communicating gifts, either of speech or healing. Even Philip, 
the signally-honoured evangelist, cannot confer any of these 
endowments on his converts. Everything indicates that with 
the last man on whom the last of the apostles laid hands all 
miraculous power in the Church ceased and determined, and 
with that power all apostolic authority. Henceforward, true 
Christians appear to be essentially on a level, alike members of 
that royal priesthood of which Christ was the great Head and 
High Priest, although differing in talent and in work. iTot 
from Scripture, certainly, can it be shown that Christ or His 
apostles ever framed an organization in any respects corre- 
sponding to what we call The Chuech. 

How, then, came such an institution into existence? For 
nothing can be plainer than that about a hundred years after 
the death of John it appears^ although in anything but apos- 
tolic garb. All is altered. 'No other change,' says Dean 
Stanley, 'equally momentous has ever since affected its for- 
tunes; yet none has ever been so silent and secret. The 
Church has now become history, the history not of an isolated 
community or of isolated individuals, but of an organized 
society, incorporated with the political systems of the world.' 

Was this change, then, healthy development — the fore- 
intended growth of the acorn into the oak ? or was it corrup- 
tion — the first signal indication of that new order of things 



CHURCH AUTHOEITY. 229 

which then so mysteriously manifested itself, at once as an evil 
and a good : good in so far as it reared saints and subdued 
Paganism in the Roman empire ; evil in its later developments 
culminating in the Papacy? A satisfactory answer to this 
question would solve many difficulties. 

Hard is it to believe that a Church which produced so many 
Christian heroes, so many great and good men, should, in any 
sense whatever, be worthily called a ^Mystery of Iniquity.' 
Harder still, however, is it to imagine, on a review of the 
superstitions encouraged and the persecutions carried on for 
ages by its ecclesiastical tribunals, literally drunk with the 
blood of the saints; its Christianity so dead and morally 
degraded that nothing but the inroads of an impostor like 
Mahomet could cleanse the plains of Asia of the impurities it 
had nurtured there ; its only religion, a religion of sacraments, 
under the guise of which the pastors of the Church had, as 
Coleridge puts it, 'gradually changed the life and light of the 
Gospel into the very superstitions they were commissioned to 
disperse, and thus paganized Christianity in order to christen 
paganism.' Hard is it to see in such a Church anything but a 
profound mystery of God, a mystery of spiritual evil, a mystery 
of iniquity. Be this, however, as it may, nothing can certainly 
be deduced either from its past or its present existence, or 
from the past or present history of any of the Reformed 
Churches, which can for a moment sustain the assertion that 
God has committed the development of doctrine or the power 
of decision in cases of doubt to any body of men, however 
earnest or good they may be, or however much they may have 
accomplished in the spread of the Gospel, in the civilisation of 
nations, or in the regions of benevolent activity. 



230 2iroTEs. 



E. (Chap. X. p. 196.) 

IDOLATRY OF THE BIBLE. 

^ Idolatry of the written Word expressetli itself in the holy 
— but I call it unholy — nation, which they have taken up con- 
cerning inspiration, that the very words are inspired, and the 
writers were but organs of voice for that Word. . . . And 
in the same spirit they require of you at once to believe the 
Book as the Word of God, by one act of faith to adopt it, then 
to read it and bow down before what you read; That is to 
make the Book an idol, and then prostrate your soul unto it. 
And by so doing, you shall make your soul a timorous creature 
of superstition, or a blind worshipper of sounds and sentences ; 
but never a child of the Spirit of God. Such notions flow not 
from orthodox doctrine which saith anto every man. Read this 
Word with what persuasion of its Divine authority you pres- 
ently have, and affect not more than you really have, for that 
is falsehood or superstition, which God abhorreth. Bring to it 
the faculties of mind which you presently have, and peruse it 
with the desire to be enlightened in the deep things which it 
containeth, and the Spirit will open your soul to understand 
it more and "more, and dispose your heart to receive it more 
and more, and constrain your will to obey it more and more : 
and as your soul grows into its confirmation more and more, 
you will believe it more and more, and your faith in its inspi- 
ration will grow with your spiritual growth and strengthen 
with your spiritual strength.' — The Idolatry of the Bible, by 
the Rev. Edward Irving. 

From an article on the Theology of Luther, by the Rev. Dr. 
Dorner, Contemporary Review, '^o, xii» 

(L) ' Holy Scripture, in its real message and purport, receives 
its full credentials to the heart, by the illumination of the Spirit 



IDOLATRY OF THl*: BIBLE. - ZOi 

kindling in us a Divine assurance of the truth of this message 
— an assurance infinitely superior to any mere reliance on the 
canon of the Church, and on the correctness of the Church's 
judgment with regard to Scripture.' 

(2.) ' Scripture can only be understood by a kindred mind 
and spirit. That which is necessary to salvation is intelligible 
to all who are spiritually disposed, and inequalities in mental 
culture and philological skill are, in everything material, com- 
pensated by the perspicuity of the Scripture. The believer is 
the instrument which Scripture creates for itself by means of 
which to interpret itself.' 

(3.) ' The expounder is not to expound Scripture after the 
standard of any human conception of its doctrine, be that 
standard the Apostles' Creed, the regula or analogia fidei^ or 
the teaching of the Church. He who asserts such standard to 
be necessary, denies the perspicuity of Scripture. The only 
analogy for exposition is the principle that one scripture can- 
not contradict another.' 

(4.) 'Luther makes no difficulty in allowing, that in exter- 
nals, not only Stephen, but the sacred writers themselves have 
fallen into inaccuracies. The worth of the Old Testament is 
not diminished in his eyes by the concession that several of its 
pieces have been worked up by various hands. What matters 
it, he asks, with reference to the Pentateuch, if Moses did not 
write it ?' 

(5.) 'Luther recognises in Scripture not merely something 
Divine, but something human. The German Keformer unques- 
tionably draws a distinction between the word of God and the 
Holy Scripture, not merely in the form, but also in the purport 
of the message.' 

(6.) Luther 'awards to faith a right of judging the canon on 
grounds not arbitrary, but objective and dogmatic ; and quite 
distinct from any investigations of the genuineness and antiquity 
of its parts. . . . The right of faith to judge and criticise 
Scripture is, however, a negative right, reducing itself to the 



232 NOTES. 

denial of canonical authority, to all that would contradict faith. 
And as faith must agree with Scripture, this judgment of Scrip- 
ture 'by faith reduces itself ultimately to a judgment of Scrip' 
ture hy itself To the power of interpreting itself, which he 
ascribes to Scripture, corresponds in his system the power of 
Scripture to decide what is really Scripture. ..... The 

process of combining faith with the word of God must be con- 
tinuous ; we must be always reconciling Scripture and the 
Christian consciousness^ in order to obtain that full and un- 
doubting certainty which consists in t=he union of the personal 
and subjective with the objective word of God in Scripture. 
Thus, the certainty and joy of faith is not suspended for 
Luther by allowing criticism all its rights ; nor, on the other 
hand, does Scripture lose in value and authority by the empha- 
sis he lays on faith, but rather gains in these respects, inas- 
much as Scripture becomes an internal authority with which 
faith cannot dispense. 



THE END. 



NEW AND POPULAR BOOKS 

JUST PUBLISHED BY 




654 BROADWAY, NEW YORK. 



NEW WORK BY IK MARVEL 

RURAL STUDIES. 

WITH PRACTICAL HINTS FOR COUNTRY PLACES, 

BY IK MARVEL. 

ILLUSTRATED BY THE AUTHOR. 
In I voL i2mo., uniform with " My Farm of Edgewood.** $i 75". 

As the title implies, the book contains a body of hints foi 
those living in the country, and for those who think of living 
there. 

The author has sought, by the introduction of his friends 
Lackland and Urban, to demonstrate — 

1st. IV^hy a man should go^ if at all^ into the country, 

2d. What sort of a homestead he should seek there. 

Jd. What he should do when in possession of it, 

IK MARYEL'S WORKS-7 Yols., riz., 

I. REVERIES OF A BACHELOR, i vol. i2mo $1 75 

*' " " Cabinet Ed., 1 vol. i6mo. i 75 

II. DREAM LIFE, i vol. i2mo 175 

'* '' Cabinet Edition, I vol. i6mo 175 

III. MY FARM OF EDGEWOOD. i vol. izmo i 75 

IV. WET DAYS OF EDGEWOOD. *' " i 75 

V. SEVEN STORIES. I vol. i2mo 175 

VI. DOCTOR JOHN S. 2 vols. i2mo 350 

Copies sent hymail, postage paid^ on receipt of price. 



1. New Volume of Lange's Commen- 
tary on the Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude. i vol. 8vo. 

$5. 

2. Liber Librorum. 

Uniform with "£cc« Deus'''' ard ''^Ecce Homo.'''' I vol. l6mo. 
$1 50 

TJRBNCJI'S NEW WO UK, 

3. Studies in the Gospels. 

By Rt. Rev. R. C. Trench, i vol. 8vo. $3. 

4. The Public Debt of the United 

STATES. By J. S. Gibbons, i vol. crown 8vo. Pr ce $2. 
The object of this volume is to clear away the obscurity that 
hangs over the public debt, and to make it intelligible to the 
people. It describes the different kinds of Government securities, 
explains the nature of the debt, the bearings of taxation, and 
the rights as well as the duties of the tax-payers. It shows how 
the taxes may be reduced and the debt gradually paid at the 
same time. It explains, also, the use of currency, and endeavors 
to prove that there are natural and scientific principles and laws 
which g-overn all the relations of labor, industry, trade, and com- 
merce, on which our financial system, to be permanent and useful, 
must be founded and administered. 

5. Life of Carl Ritter. 

By Rev. W. L. GAGE, i vol. i2mo. $1 75. 

MEV. JDIt. SHEJDD'S NEW WOBK, 

6- A Treatise on Homiletics and Pas- 

TORAL THEOLOGY. By William G. T. Shedd, D. D., 
of the New York Union Theological Seminary, and author 
of the " History of Christian Doctrine." One vol. 8vo., 
tinted paper, 450 pages. $3 50. 
The work attempts to exhibit the fundamental principles in- 
volved in Preaching and Pastoral Duty, and at the same time to 
meet the practical v/ants of the clerical profession. The Pub- 
1 shers expect that it will prove to be a useful text-book for those 
who are preparing for the sacred ministry ; and also a work of 
interest and profit to those who are already in the profession. 
MANY OF THE TOPICS DISCUSSED AND TRAINS OF 
REFLECTION WILL HAVE VALUE FOR THE LEGAL 
PROFESSION, AND FOR GENERAL READERS IN 
HIGHER RANGES OF LITERATURE. 

The work is printed in the same style and form as Dr. Shedd's 
History of Christian Doctrine, which has met with such a favora- 
ble reception from the theological public. 

Also, New Edition of HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN DOC- 
TRINE, by same author 2 vols. 8vo. Tinted paper. Fifth 
Edition. $6 50. 

Copies sent hy mail., postage paid^ on receipt of pnce. 



7. Literary Life of James K. Paulding. 

Compiled by his Son, Wm. J, Paulding. 
Comprises the career of this author for sixty years, during what 
may be called the formative period of American literature ; por- 
tions of his correspondence with Washington Irving and others, 
bearing for the most part on literary concerns — extracts from 
works now out of print — and some matter never before puDlished. 
I vol. crown 8vo. Fine Portrait. $2 50 

TWO NEW rOZVMJES (9 aiid 10) OF 

8. Froude's History of England, 

From the Fall of Wolset to the Death of Elizabeth. 

By James Froude, M. A., of Exeter College. From the 

Fifth London edition. In 10 crown 8vo. vols., $3 each ; 01 

half calf, $5 each. 
The '' British Quarterly Review'* for January, 1867, says: — 
•''■ They are a worthy continuation of a history which will hold 
a high place in English literature. Mr. Froude belongs to the 
school of Carlyle, but he is not an imitator of that great writer. 
He equals him in industry and profound study, but he is calmer 
and more natural in his tone, more thoughtful in his remarks on 
events, more unaffected in his narrative, and more simple and 
lifelike in his portraits. In the main, he is a pictorial historian, 
and his skill in description and fulness of knowledge make his work 
abound in scenes and passages that are almost new to the general 
reader. 

9. Studies in English ; 

or. Glimpses of the Inner Life of our Language. 
By M. Schele be Verb, LL.D., Professor of Modern Lan- 
guages in the University of Virginia, i vol. crown 8vo., 
tinted paper. Price $2 50. 
The New York '' Tribune" says : — 

" Kis book, though showing the fruits of various erudition, is 
net intended exclusively for scholars ; it may be read to advantage 
by all who have any respect for sense or conscience in the use of 
words, and who believe that justness of thought is closely con- 
nected with propriety of expression." 

TWO NJEW VOIjTJMBS (2 and 3) OF 

10. History of the Christian Church, 

From Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. 
A. D. 311-600. Being vols. 2 and 3 of "Ancient Christian- 
ity." By Philip Schaff, D. D. 2 vols. Bvo. Price $7 50. 
Also just ready. New Edition of vol. i, same work, A. D. I-311. 
S3 75. 
The New York " Tribune" says : — 

"In the union of profound and exact learning with the gift of 
popular representation, Dr. Schaff is almost without a rival among 
modern ecclesiastical historians. In his hands the history of the 
Church is not a barren record of forgotten names and obsolete 
dogmas, but an attractive picture of the intellectual and moral 
life of successive ages. 

Copies sent 'bg mail, postage paid, on receipt of price 



fl. Elements of Logic. 

By Professor Henry N. Day, author of " Art of Rhetoric." 

Price $1 50. 
Comprising the Doctrine of the Laws and Products of Thought 
and the Doctrine of Method, together with a Logical Praxis, 
designed for Classes and Private Study. 

We have also lately issued the following Im- 
portant Works : 
The Constitutional Convention, its History, Powers, 

and Modes of Proceeding, etc. By John A. Jameson, Judge 
of the Superior Court of Chicago, Illinois, i vol. 8vo. Cloth, 
$4 50 ; law sheep, $6. 

Lange on Acts. Being the third volume issued of Lange"'s 
Commentary on the Bible, i vol. royal 8vo. $5. 

Guyot's Common School Geography, i ^oi. 4to,$i 80. 

Guyot's Primary Geography, i vol. 4to, 90 cts. 

Tenney's (Sanborn and Abby Amy) Natural His- 
tory of Animals. For Parents, Teachers, and Pupils. De- 
signed to accompany Tenney's Natural History Tablets. $2. 

Randolph's (A. D. F.) Hopefully Waiting, and other 

verses, i vol, i6mo. ^i 50. 



J^ust Meady, New Editions, at Meduced Prices : 

Fisher's (Rev. Geo. P.) Essays on the Supernatural 

Origin of Christianity. $2 50. 

Hon. Geo. P. Marsh's Works. 3 vols 8vo. $3 each. 

I. LECTrRES ON THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. 

a. Origin and History of the English Language. 
3. Man and Nature; or. Physical Geography, as Modi- 
fied By Human Action. 

Woolsey's (Pres't D. D.) Introduction to the Study 

of International Law. Third edition, revised and enlarged, 

I250. 

Maine's (Henry S.) Ancient Law; its connection with 

the Early History of Society, and its Relation to Modern Ideas. 
I vol. crown 8vo. $3. 

Perry's (Prof. A. L.) Elements of Political Econo- 
my. By Arthur Latham Perry. Revised and enlarged. 
I vol. $2 50. 

Copies sent hy mail, postage paid, on receipt of price. 



